Rajasthan High Court
Anil Kumar S/O Ramniwas vs Union Of India on 19 February, 2024
Author: Praveer Bhatnagar
Bench: Praveer Bhatnagar
[2024:RJ-JP:8012]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 15833/2023
Anil Kumar S/o Ramniwas, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Ward
Number 04, Brahmin Moholla, Kharkhuda, Sonipath, Haryana. (At
Present In Central Jail, Jaipur)
----Accused-Petitioner
Versus
Union Of India, Through Intelligence Officer, Office Of Directorate
General Of Commodity And Tax Intelligence, Jaipur Zonal Unit,
Jaipur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Subodh Kumar Sharma with
Mr. Gaurav Jain
Mr. Prashant Khandelwal
Mr. Vijay Gupta
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Kinshuk Jain, Sr. Standing Counsel
for DGGI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEER BHATNAGAR
Judgment / Order
19/02/2024
The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439
Cr.P.C. on behalf of accused-petitioner. The petitioner has been
arrested in connection with Complaint No.DGGI/INV/122/2023-Gr-F
O/o ADG-DGGI-ZU-Jaipur for the offence(s) under Section 132 (1)
(b) (c) (f) and (l) of CGST Act, 2017.
Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has been falsely implicated under Section 132 (1)
(b) (c) (f) and (l) of CGST Act, 2017. The accused-petitioner is
behind the bars since 18.11.2023. The offence is triable by
Magistrate and having maximum punishment of five years. The
[2024:RJ-JP:8012] (2 of 4) [CRLMB-15833/2023]
trial of the case may take considerable time, therefore, the bail
application of accused-petitioner may be allowed.
Learned counsel for the accused-petitioner placed his
reliance upon the order passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Ratnambar Kaushik Vs. Union of India [2022 SCC Online
SC 1678] decided on 05.12.2022 and invited attention of this
Court at Para No.6 of the order.
Per contra, learned Senior Counsel for Union of India opposed
the bail application and submitted that accused-petitioner Anil
Kumar issued fake bills from seven firms managed by him and
taking ITC through fake bills issued by fake firms created by Shri
Ashutosh Garg. It is also alleged against the accused-petitioner
that he opened four more firms and issued fake bills without
supplying of goods/services. He also submitted that present
petitioner is also involved for selling invoices issued from fake
firms of Shri Ashutosh Garg on commission basis. The investigation
also reveals that accused-petitioner Anil Kumar operated seven
firms and have issued goods less invoices passing on fake ITC
amounting to Rs.20,28,40,841/-.
Learned Senior Counsel for Union of India further submitted
that charge-sheet against the accused-petitioner for prosecuting
under Section 132 (1) (b) (c) (f) and (l) of CGST Act, 2017 read with
sub-Section 5 of the Act has already been submitted. He further
argued that the facts of the case referred by learned counsel for
the petitioner are entirely different from the facts in the case of
Ratnambar Kaushik (supra). It was alleged against the accused
that he clandestinely transported raw un-manufactured tobacco
brought from Gujarat by seven trucks weighing 90,520 Kgs. and
[2024:RJ-JP:8012] (3 of 4) [CRLMB-15833/2023]
the raw un-manufactured tobacco was cleared in the name of M/s.
Maa Ambe Enterprises. It was also alleged that supply of chewing
tobacco was made without paying leviable duties amounting to
Rs.15,57,28,345/-. In the present case, the accused-petitioner has
initiated the fake ITCs without supplying goods and caused loss of
Rs.20,28,40,841/- to the Government.
Learned Senior Counsel for Union of India placed his reliance
upon the order passed in Lalit Goyal Vs. Union of India & Anr.
passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.3509/2022 dated 26.08.2022 and Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No.8128/2022 in Basudev Mittal Vs. Union of India dated
12.12.2022. He further submitted that the offences under Section
132 (b) (c) and (l) are cognizable and non- bailable offence.
Learned Senior Counsel for Union of India further submitted
that economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be
visited with a different approach in the matter of bail, therefore,
considering the fact that accused-petitioner has fake ITCs amount
of Rs.20,28,40,841/- without supplying the goods, bail application
of accused-petitioner may be dismissed.
Heard and perused the charge sheet, so also, the law
referred by both the parties.
The allegation in the charge sheet itself speaks and states
that accused-petitioner has generated the fake ITCs of
Rs.20,28,40,841/-. It is settled law that economic offences
constitute a class apart and required to be scanned with a
different approach in the matter of bail. In the matter of
Ratnambar Kaushik (supra), the facts were entirely different and
that was not a case of generating the fake ITC. In that case, goods
[2024:RJ-JP:8012] (4 of 4) [CRLMB-15833/2023]
were supplied without paying the CGST. In the present case, the
facts are entirely different. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of
Lalit Goyal (supra) vide order dated 26.08.2022 dismissed the bail
application of the petitioner. In the matter of Lalit Goyal, it was
alleged that petitioner Lalit Goyal and other persons had made
various fake firms and claimed Input Tax Credit of Rs.18.91 Crores
without any transportation of goods. In that case, co-ordinate
Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No.13042/2021 dated 07.09.2021 dismissed the bail application of
the petitioner and in SLP vide order dated 26.08.2022, the Hon'ble
Apex Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition, therefore,
considering the gravity of the offence, so also, that petitioner has
taken a fake Input Tax Credit (ITC) worth of Rs.20,28,40,841/-, I am
not inclined to enlarge the accused-petitioner on bail.
Accordingly, the bail application of accused-petitioner under
Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
(PRAVEER BHATNAGAR),J
SURAJ KUMAR
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
