Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Hemant Kumar Singhal S/O Ashok Kumar ... vs Union Of India on 4 November, 2020
Author: Pankaj Bhandari
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8676/2020
Hemant Kumar Singhal S/o Ashok Kumar Singhal, Aged About
30 Years, R/o 26, Shastripuram, Sector-3, Bharatpur,(At Present
Confined To Central Jail, Jaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India, Central Goods And Services Tax,
Commissioneraste, Alwar, through Special PP
----Respondent
Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11253/2020 Pankaj Garg S/o Late Sh. Ramkishan Garg, Aged About 45 Years, R/o 89 Prohit Mohalla Bharatpur Raj. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Jaipur Raj.)
----Petitioner Versus Union Of India, through PP
----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jatin Harjai, Mr. Gautam Bhadadra Mr. Sameer Jain with Mr. Daksh Pareek, Mr. Arjun Singh, Ms. Mareena Tuteja For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anand Sharma Mr. Siddharth Ranka HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI Order Reserved on 02.11.2020 Pronounced on 04 .11.2020
1. Petitioners have filed these bail applications under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.
(Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:29:25 PM)
(2 of 4) [CRLMB-8676/2020] 2. Case No. IV(06)121/AE/Alwar/2020 was registered for
offence under Section 132(1)(b)(c)(f) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
3. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner- Hemant Kumar Singhal that case of the petitioner would not travel beyond Section 132(1)(f) of C.G.S.T. Act, the maximum punishment for which as provided under the Act is only six months. It is contended that petitioner has not created any fake bills/invoices and has not availed or passed on any input tax credit. It is also contended that petitioner has remained in custody for a period of three months. The main accused in this case is Abhishek Singhal, who is absconding.
4. It is also contended that petitioner has appeared before the Authorities and has answered their queries. Petitioner-Hemant Kumar Singhal is pursuing his C.A. Course and his brother is a registered C.A., who is stated to be the main accused and was instrumental in getting GST registration of 38 fake firms. It is only because he is brother of the main accused that he has been arrested.
5. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner- Pankaj Garg that petitioner is a businessman who is running a petrol pump and the only allegation against him is that his mobile number has been mentioned in registration of S.L. Trading Company. It is argued that petitioner's documents were used by Abhishek Singhal, for which he has lodged an FIR against him. The total input tax credit as calculated by the Authorities is to the tune of around 6 crores. There is no evidence that petitioner has availed any input tax (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:29:25 PM) (3 of 4) [CRLMB-8676/2020] credit or has produced any fake bills/invoices to facilitate claiming of input tax credit.
6. It is also contended that petitioner was not instrumental in creation of the fake firms. Even if it is considered that he was also a party to the creation of the fake firms, the act would fall under Section 132(1)(f) of the C.G.S.T. Act, the maximum sentence for which is six months.
7. Counsels for the petitioners have placed reliance on Sanjay Chandra vs. CBI [2012(1) SCC 40].
8. Learned counsels appearing on behalf of Union of India have opposed these bail applications. It is contended that economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country.
9. Counsels for Union of India have placed reliance on P.V. Ramana Reddy vs. UOI [SLP (Crl.) No.4430/2019].
10. I have considered the contentions.
11. Considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioners, I deem it proper to allow these bail applications.
12. These bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lac only) together with two sureties in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two Lac Fifty Thousand only) each to the (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:29:25 PM) (4 of 4) [CRLMB-8676/2020] satisfaction of the learned trial court with the stipulation that they shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so.
13. However, it is made clear that petitioners will surrender their passport to the Court and will not leave India without taking prior permission from the Court.
14. A copy of this order be placed in connected file.
(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J CHANDAN /41-42 (Downloaded on 05/11/2020 at 09:29:25 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)