HC says, Economic Offenders are Serious Threat to Nation, denies Bail to Rs.869 Crore GST evader [Read Order]

Refusing relief to Director of a Company facing charges for allegedly evading ₹869 crore GST, the Rajasthan High Court remarked that Economic Offenders are serious threat to Nation.

The single-judge bench of Justice Narendra Singh Dhaddha while denying bail to the petitioner relied on various SC precedents to note that an economic offender should not be dealt with as a general offender because economic offenders run a parallel economy which pose a serious threat to the national economy.

The Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner had pleaded that his client has been falsely ropped into the case. He submitted that in first complaint, there was not a single word regarding alleged offence against the petitioner, however, in the supplementary complaint only allegation of the offence based on the statement of the petitioner which he had retracted from has been levelled. He also averred that since Apex Court has granted bail to co-accused, the pettioner should be released on the ground of parity.

He further submitted that the case against the petitioner is on surmises and conjectures and that maximum punishment in this case is 5 years and case against the petitioner is triable by Magistrate. He alleged that the respondent department had not seized any unaccounted bill regarding packaging of tabacco in the premises also stated that they had deposited the amount of Rs.100 Crores and will deposit the same amount again.

Stating that Offence against the petitioner is compoundable, he contended that provision of Section 173(8) Cr.P.C. is not applicable in this case and Department had not taken leave from concerned Court for further investigation. The Trial will take time to conclude and thus petitioner can be granted bail, he pleaded.

Learned Senior Counsel placed reliance on catena of cases including Naresh Chandra Bhardwaj Vs. Bank of India, 2019 Latest Caselaw 410 SC and Khekh Ram Vs. State of H.P. [NOVEMBER 10, 2017], 2017 Latest Caselaw 791 SC

On the other hand, Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent submitted that if the petitioner is ready to deposit evasion of tax with penalty then he has no objection in granting the bail. He added that petitioner is responsible for the tax evasion.

The Court upon after considering the submission put-forth by learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the present case and also looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) alleged against the petitioner without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, didn't deem it fit to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C 

"The Hon’ble Apex Court in various pronouncement held that the economic offender should not be dealt as general offender because economic offenders run parallel economy and they are serious threat to the national economy. Case of the petitioner is similar to the Vinaykant Ameta Vs. Union Of India and bail of the Vinaykant Ameta was dismissed by this Court and Hon’ble Apex Court had granted the bail of Vinaykant Ameta on depositing of Rs.200 Crores."

Read Order Here: