condition for anticipatory bail
Case Title | Ritik Arora vs Union Of India |
Court | Rajasthan High Court |
Honorable Judges | Justice Manoj Kumar Garg |
Citation | 2022 (9) GSTPanacea 324 HC Rajasthan S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5830/2022 |
Judgement Date | 20-September-2022 |
Council for Petitioner | Mr. Vikas Balia, Dinesh Kumar Godara, Mayank Taparia, Priyansh Arora |
Council for Respondent | Mr. Rajvendra Saraswat |
In favour of | Petitioner |
Section | Section 132(1)(a) (f)(h)(j) & (k) r/w Section 132 (1)(I)(i) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Section 20 of Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act. Also section 438 of Cr.PC |
The Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Garg, has held that, the bail application is allowed and it is directed and the petitioner shall be released on bail.
FACTS OF THE CASE
This anticipatory bail applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Section 132(1)(a) (f)(h)(j) & (k) r/w Section 132 (1)(I)(i) of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 and Section 20 of Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act. The petitioner submits that the present petitioner is being sought to be implicated in a false case only because he is son of the co-accused Anil Kumar and there is no other evidence against the petitioner to connect him with the alleged crime. Learned counsel further argued that petitioner is a young boy who is pursuing his studies and no prima facie case whatsoever is made out against him. It is submitted that neither any assessment order has been passed nor any demand has been raised against the petitioner. Learned counsel referred to Section 122 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act and submits that even if there is any evasion of tax, the section provides for penalty as a consequence, apart from the requirement to pay the tax and applicable interest. It is further submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate in the investigation but despite that the department is harassing the petitioner with the sole objective of arresting him but no purpose would be served by sending the petitioner in custody. The UOI vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the Anti Evasion Wing of respondent intercepted two vehicles carrying iron scrap. On interception, the drivers of the vehicles were asked to produce the documents. The drivers produced the invoices but did not produce any e-way bill for movement of goods. The goods were dispatched on the order of co-accused Anil Kumar Arora and petitioner Ritik Arora. Upon search of the premises, the bill uploaded during registration on GST portal was found to be fake. It is submitted that during course of investigation, it has been revealed that petitioner is active accomplice to his father and both evaded tax to the tune of Rs. 7.97 crores.
condition for anticipatory bail
COURT HELD
The Court held that it is revealed that the main allegation with regard to tax evasion is against the father of the petitioner i.e. Anil Kumar Arora who allegedly cleared goods without issuance of e-way bill and payment of GST and evaded crores of tax. The only allegation against the present petitioner is that he is an active accomplice to his father accused Anil Kumar Arora, however no prima facie case is made out against the present petitioner with regard to tax evasion. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and upon a consideration of the arguments advanced at the bar so also considering the fact the petitioner is a young man pursuing his studies, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. However, it is expected from him to observe and follow the fundamental duties of a good citizen as enshrined in Article 51-A of the Constitution of India. The bail application is allowed and it is directed and the petitioner shall be released on bail.
condition for anticipatory bail
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGEMENT
By noticing the above order we analyse that a family member should not be arrested in a case of GST violation if he not involved in the concerned case.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit: