[2023/RJJP/000583]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous 2nd Bail Application No.14123/2022
Badri Lal Mali son of Shri Mukna Ram Mali, aged about 28 Years,
Resident of Village Bhasu, Tehsil Todaraisingh, Distt. Tonk (Raj.)
Presently resident of Aditya Apartment Ground Floor, Plot No. G-67,
Vishwa Nagar, New Sanganer Road, Sodala, Jaipur
(At present confined in Central Jail, Jaipur)
----Accused-Petitioner
Versus
Senior Intelligence Officer Directorate, General of Goods & Service
Tax, Intelligence Jaipur Zonal Unit Jaipur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.N. Mathur, Senior Adv. assisted by
Mr. Om Prakash Sharma, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kinshuk Jain, Senior Standing
Counsel for DGGI &
Mr. Yeshwant Kankhedia, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
Date of Order ::: 27 th of January, 2023
***
Instant 2nd application has been preferred under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the petitioner, namely Badri Lal Mali, in a case arising out of Complaint Case No.14/2021 titled as State V/s Vishnu & Ors. [F.No.DGGI/INT/104/ 2021-Gr.F-) O/o ADG-DGGI-ZU Jaipur] for offences punishable under Sections 132 (1) (i) & (iv) readwith Section (5) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.
It has been submitted by learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner that the alleged offences are triable by 1 st Class Magistrate and they have maximum punishment of five-years with a fine if the allegation of input tax credit wrongly availed exceeds five hundred lacs rupees. Counsel has further submitted that the petitioner (Downloaded on 31/01/2023 at 11:48:56 PM) [2023/RJJP/000583] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-14123/2022] was arrested on 21.01.2021 and he has been in confinement for more than twenty-four months, continuously. Counsel has also submitted that no offence is made out against the petitioner as he was merely an employee of the main accused- Vishnukant Garg & has not caused any loss to any person or Government and the trial of the case will take a long time.
It has further been argued by learned counsel appearing for the accused-petitioner that looking to the Para Nos.3, 4.7.7, 4.7.8.3, 4.7.8.5, 12.3.2 & 12.3.3 of the complaint and the fact that the bail application of main accused, namely Vishnu Kant Garg under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has already been granted by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 09.12.2022, the present bail application of the accused-petitioner may be granted.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Union of India, while strongly opposing the bail application, has argued that since dismissal of the first bail application of petitioner, there has been no change in the facts & circumstances of the case and looking to Para Nos.12.3, 12.3.2, 13.3 & 14 of the complaint, the bail application of the petitioner may be rejected.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Union of India, has placed reliance upon the following orders/judgments:- (1) Bhagwan Sahay Gupta Vs. U.O.I., (S.B. CRLMB No.5882/2021) RHCB Jaipur dt.04.05.2021, (2) Mahendra Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. CRLMB No.7564/2021) RHCB Jaipur dt.29.06.2021, (3) Dashrath Singh Vs. U.O.I. (S.B. CRLMB No.5392/2022) RHCB Jaipur dt.07.09.2022, (4) Mahendra Saini Vs. State of Rajasthan, (S.B. CRLMB No.14670/2021) RHCB Jaipur dt.28.01.2022, (5) Sumit Dutta Vs. U.O.I. (S.B. CRLMB No.12427/2022) RHCB Jaipur dt.29.09.2022, (6) Ratnambar Kaushik Vs. U.O.I. (S.B. CRLMB (Downloaded on 31/01/2023 at 11:48:56 PM) [2023/RJJP/000583] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-14123/2022] No.12475/2022) RHCB Jaipur dt.21.10.2022, (7) Lalit Goyal Vs. U.O.I. (S.L.P. (Crl.) No.3509/2022 S.C. dt. 26.08.2022, (8) State of Gujarat Vs. Mohanlal J. Porwal, (1987) 2 SCC 364, (9) Pramod Kumar Saxena Vs. U.O.I. (2008) 9 SCC 685, (10)Murti Bhawani Mata Mandir Vs. Ramesh, (2019) 3 SCC 707 and (11) ICDS Ltd. Vs. C.I.T., (2013) 3 SCC 541.
Heard and perused the material available made on record as well as the orders/judgments cited herein-above.
In the present case, the first bail application of petitioner under Section 439 of Cr.P.C was dismissed by this Court vide its order dated 31.08.2022 as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh bail application at appropriate stage. The petitioner is behind the bars since 24.01.2021 and he has been in confinement for more than 24 months, continuously. The alleged offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term, which may extend to five-years, with a fine. The bail application of main accused, namely Vishnukant Garg under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has already been granted by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 09.12.2022.
Therefore, looking to the above facts & circumstances of the present case but without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, this Court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner, namely Badri Lal Mali son of Shri Mukna Ram Mali shall be enlarged on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for his appearance before the Court concerned on all the dates of (Downloaded on 31/01/2023 at 11:48:56 PM) [2023/RJJP/000583] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-14123/2022] hearing and as and when called upon to do so with the following conditions :-
(i) The petitioner shall fully co-operate in the trial.
(ii) The petitioner shall not leave the Country without prior permission of the concerned Court."(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J.
ASHOK/88 (Downloaded on 31/01/2023 at 11:48:56 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)