Naresh Chandra Jajra S/O Late Shri ... vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 1835 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 1914/2022

Naresh Chandra Jajra S/o Late Shri Balkrishan Jajra, Aged About
49 Years, R/o Shri Ram Bhawan B-3 Shakti Nagar Gali No. 1
Pawta C, Jodhpur Raj. (Presently Confined In Central Jail Jaipur)
                                                                  ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
Union Of India, Through Pp
                                                                ----Respondent

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. K. Gupta, Senior Counsel with Ms. Surabhi Agarwal, Adv., Mr. Sudhir Sangal, Adv. & Mr. Ravi Chandhok, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kinshuk Jain, Senior Standing Counsel for DGGI

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

25/02/2022

1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439

Cr.P.C. arising out of file No.DGGI/INV/GST/3064/2021-Gr-B-

O/OADG-DGGI-JZU-JAIPUR for the offence(s) punishable under

Sections 132(1) of the Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017.

2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner has been wrongly implicated in this case. He is behind

the bars since 24.12.2021. Learned senior counsel for the

petitioner further submits that the charge-sheet has been filed

against the petitioner. There is no incriminating evidence against

the petitioner. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also

submits that the petitioner is neither proprietor of the Sagar

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-1914/2022]

Industries nor he is the owner. Learned senior counsel for the

petitioner further submits that the petitioner had retracted the

statement given by him under Section 70 of G.S.T. Act. Learned

senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner

had given Sagar Industries by way of agreement to Abhishek

Gehlot. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that

statements of the Abhishek Gahlot and Lalit Vyas cannot be read

against him. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further

submits that maximum punishment in this case is 5 years and

conclusion of trial may take long time. So, the petitioner be

enlarged on bail.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance

upon the following judgments:(1) Shri Vikas Bansal, Versus

Union Of India in Bail Application No.2381/2021; (2)

Dananjay Singh Versus Union Of India in S. B. Criminal

Miscellaneous Bail Application No.18825/2021; (3) Kishore

Wadhwani Versus State of M.P. reported in 2022(43)

G.S.T.L. 145(M.P.).

4. Learned Senior Standing Counsel has opposed the

arguments advanced by learned senior counsel for the petitioner

and submitted that the petitioner had evaded GST around of Rs.

21 crores. He is the main culprit. During investigation, statements

under Section 70 of G.S.T. Act were recorded and which are

admissible in evidence. Learned senior standing counsel further

submits that case of the petitioner is not similar to the case of

Dananjay Singh Versus Union Of India. Case of the petitioner

is similar to the case of Vinay Kant Ameta Versus Union Of

India and bail of the Vinay Kant Ameta was rejected by this Court

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-1914/2022]

and Hon'ble Apex Court has granted the bail to the Vinay Kant

Ameta on depositing of Rs.200 crores. So, looking to the gravity of

offence, bail be dismissed.

5. Considering the contentions put-forth by the learned senior

counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the facts and

circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on

the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to

enlarge the petitioner on bail.

6. Accordingly, the bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is

allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioner Naresh

Chandra Jajra S/o Late Shri Balkrishan Jajra 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 hearing as and when called

upon to do so.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Gourav/61

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)