Jharkhand High Court
Vishnu Saw @ Vishnu Kumar Saw vs The State Of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party on 10 April, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2019 JHA 258
Author: Anant Bijay Singh
Bench: Anant Bijay Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 62 of 2019
Vishnu Saw @ Vishnu Kumar Saw ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Sr. Advocate.
Mr. Deepankar, Advocate.
For the State : A.P.P.
---------
Reserved On : Dated: 29/03/2019 Pronounced On : 10/04/2019 Petitioner is accused in Deoghar (Town) P.S. Case No. 351 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 955 of 2018, registered for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section132 (1)(b) / 132 (1) (c) / 132 (1)(e) of the Jharkhand GST Act, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The case of prosecution is that one Vishal Lakra, who is State Tax Officer, posted in Deoghar Circle gave a written report addressed to Officer-in-Charge, Deoghar Town P.S. alleging that an inspection of different business institutions were done by the Officers of Investigation Bureau, Santhal Pargana, Dumka with respect to a firm of one Saha Enterprises, Deoghar. The physical verification of the address given in the registration certificate which was given as 129, Brij Bihari Lane, Deoghar was done and it was found that the aforesaid firm which has GSTIN - 20FOFPS4301C1ZK does not have the aforesaid address and they tried to contact on the mobile number which was given in the GST registration i.e. 8017745404, but mobile was found to be switched off and they tried to locate the whereabouts of the proprietor Sri Moti Saw from other communities, but they showed their ignorance. Further, rent agreement was also filed with the aforesaid form while taking GST registration where owner of the land Sunil Pandey also disclosed his ignorance and it transpires that the aforesaid firm on 12.06.2015 is marked in FST and the aforesaid firm had claimed refund of Rs. 12,23,13,806/- and has got the refund under ITC on 09.11.2017 and 09.01.2018 and electronic ledger balance shown to be zero. The aforesaid firm till September have filed GSTR1 which was verified and it transpired in August, 2017 one Masaka Trading situated at Howrah have purchased article worth Rs. 53,34,62,947/- and -2- have shown sale to one Baleshka Trading Pvt. Ltd. to the amount of Rs. 1,07,97,37,812/-. further his GSTR-2A papers were verified and it transpired that in the month of August, he has shown purchase of article from Om Trading of worth Rs. 53,34,62,947/- and in the month of September from Bhootnath Enterprises, Dhanbad GSTIN - 20ANQPA9508E1ZB he has shown purchase of Rs. 1079593853.40, which prima facie found to be suspicious. So, it was submitted that on the basis of forged invoice, input credit have been obtained by the aforesaid firm and which is offence under Section 132(1)(c) of Jharkhand Goods and Services Act. On the basis of these allegations, the instant case was instituted.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and falsely implicated in this case and all the allegation against one business establishment namely, Saha Enterprises and petitioner has no relation with Saha Enterprises and only on the basis of CDR of their mobile phones inference was done that petitioner have contacted the accused persons and the entire allegation of claim of input tax credit is against Saha Enterprises. Petitioner is in custody since 28.09.2018. Investigation is complete, so petitioner deserves the privilege of bail.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State, in which it is stated that as per para-32 of the case diary, petitioner is owner of mobile bearing no. 9007909498 and he was in contact with other accused Rajesh Saw and one Alok Agarwal, whose mobile number is also given were in contact with Saha Enterprises. In para-97 of the case diary, confessional statement of one Moti Saw has been recorded who has claimed that this petitioner is one of the associate, who along with Alok Agarwal have committed the offence. In para-98 of the case diary. I.O. has recorded the statement of Rajesh Saw, who has also given confessional statement claiming himself and this petitioner that how they have created false document and committed offence. In para-99 the I.O. has recorded the confessional statement of Vishnu Saw, wherein he disclosed that he has ancestral house in Deoghar and 15-20 years after selling his house, entire family shifted to Hoogly and he was engaged with small business, but he came in contact with one Sandip Khewala in the year 2015 to whom his -3- sister is married and he along with Sandip Khewala and Rajesh Saw and Moti Saw created forged documents and committed the offences.
In para-137 of the case diary, Om Trading GSTIN No. 20FZGPS1811F1ZQ and one Saha Enterprises GSTIN No. 20FOOFPS4301C1ZK on the basis of forged and fabricated documents have got registration / migration certification under Goods and Services Act, 2017 and ITC Input Tax Credit was also claimed and taken fund on the basis of receipts of Bhootnath Enterprises.
The allegation against the petitioner is very serious relating to misappropriation of public money, I am not inclined to admit the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
It appears that on 17.12.2018 final form has been submitted against this petitioner and supplementary investigation is pending against Sandip Khewala and as the entire case is based on electronic evidence, I.T. Act has not been inserted by the I.O.
Let Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar and Superintendent of Police, Deoghar be added as opposite party nos. 2 & 3 and, at the cost of the Registry, to serve three copies of memo of bail applications along with this order to learned APP and Nodal Officer, who are directed to ensure the presence of Superintendent of Police, Deoghar or in his absence, Dy. Superintendent of Police (Headquarter) is directed to remain physically present on 12.06.2019.
List this case on 12.06.2019. On that date, Superintendent of Police, Deoghar is directed to file affidavit duly sworn by an officer not below the rank of Dy. Superintendent of Police under what circumstances, the provisions of I.T. Act has not been inserted and final form has been submitted.
Let a copy of order be communicated to the trial court and handed over to learned APP and Nodal Officer, Deoghar for transmission of the order to the Deputy Commissioner, Deoghar and Superintendent of Police, Deoghar for appearance.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.) Sunil/