2020 (1) TMI 60 - HC - GST

High Court adjusts surety bonds in tax evasion case, reducing amounts to ensure fair bail conditions.

The High Court of Allahabad modified the surety bonds in a tax evasion case under Section 132(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017. The court ... Bail application - Modification of condition of security bonds - case of applicant is that he is the businessman but at present his accounts etc have been seized. Fixing sureties bonds of ₹ 2 Crores each is nothing but denial to release the applicant on bail because such sureties cannot be furnished by the applicant as the amount is too exorbitant - HELD THAT:- Though, matter involves huge amount of tax evasion as mentioned by court below but fixing extraordinary amount in sureties or imposing any onerous condition is virtually against the spirit of bail order and it may amount denial of bail. The application of the applicant is allowed and sureties amount or ₹ 2 Crores each as imposed is modified to ₹ 50 Lacs each to the satisfaction of the Magistrate concerned - application allowed. Issues:1. Modification of sureties bonds in a case involving tax evasion under Section 132(1) (b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017.Analysis:The judgment by the High Court of Allahabad pertains to an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to modify the condition of sureties bonds imposed for the release of the applicant in a case related to tax evasion under Section 132(1) (b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017. The applicant had been in jail since December 2, 2018, in connection with the case. A bail application was previously allowed by the court, following which an application was filed to determine the amount of sureties. The In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate in Meerut had set the sureties at Rs. 2 Crores each, a sum deemed too exorbitant by the applicant's counsel, considering the applicant's circumstances as a businessman with seized accounts. The counsel cited judgments of the Apex Court to support the argument against such high surety amounts. The Additional Government Advocate opposed the applicant's plea. The High Court noted the significant tax evasion involved but found the imposition of extraordinary surety amounts to be against the spirit of the bail order, potentially leading to a denial of bail. Consequently, the court allowed the applicant's application and modified the surety amount to Rs. 50 Lacs each, to be furnished to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate.This judgment highlights the importance of balancing the conditions for bail, especially in cases involving significant financial implications like tax evasion. The court emphasized that while the seriousness of the offense must be considered, imposing excessively high surety amounts can lead to a de facto denial of bail, which goes against the principles of justice and fairness. The decision showcases the court's discretion in ensuring that bail conditions are reasonable and do not unduly burden the accused, taking into account their individual circumstances and ability to comply with the conditions set by the court.