Rajasthan High Court
Badri Lal Mali Son Of Shri Mukna Ram ... vs Senior Intelligence Officer ... on 27 January, 2023
Bench: Chandra Kumar Songara
[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
[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
[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
[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
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
