2020 (6) TMI 82 - HC - GST

Court grants bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for alleged fraudulent activities

Gaurav Maheshwari Versus State

The court granted bail to the petitioner under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving allegations of creating bogus firms for fraudulent activities and ... Bail Application - creation of bogus firms/companies solely for the purpose of fraudlently creating and issuing GST invoices without any sale/purchase and actual movement of goods - HELD THAT:- It is deemed just and proper to grant bail to the petitioner(s) under Section 439 Cr.P.C. - it is directed that petitioner(s) - Gaurav Maheshwari S/o Sampat Lal Maheshwari shall be released on bail in connection with FIR No.146/2018 of Police Station Sardarpura, Jodhpur provided he/she/they execute(s) a personal bond in the sum of ₹ 1,00,000/- and two sureties of ₹ 50,000/- each. This Court is of the view that in the prevailing circumstances of complete lock-down amidst spread of COVID-19, furnishing of two sureties will be difficult on the one hand and the same may pose eminent threat to the concerned. It is, therefore, ordered that the petitioner(s) shall be released on bail upon furnishing the personal bond. He/She/They may furnish requisite sureties by 30 th May, 2020 to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. Issues: Arrest under various sections of IPC, Second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., Allegations of creating bogus firms for fraudulent activities, Misappropriation of government money, Bail application opposed by Public Prosecutor and complainant, Granting bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C., Bail conditions during COVID-19 lockdown.The judgment involves a case where the petitioner was arrested under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and filed a second bail application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). The petitioner was accused of creating bogus firms/companies to fraudulently issue GST invoices without actual transactions. The defense argued that the allegations were false, claiming the complainant, who is the petitioner's brother-in-law, withdrew money using cheques signed by the petitioner. The defense contended that all transactions were lawful, and the petitioner should be granted bail as the offenses were triable by a Magistrate.On the contrary, the Public Prosecutor and the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application. They alleged that the petitioner misappropriated around 17 crores of government funds, with only one crore recovered so far. The petitioner was accused of being the mastermind behind the fraud, creating bogus firms to claim GST refunds for non-existent transactions. The prosecution feared that releasing the petitioner on bail could lead to witness tampering and requested denial of bail.The court noted that the police had completed the investigation, filed a charge-sheet against the petitioner for offenses triable by a Magistrate, and the petitioner was in judicial custody. Without expressing any opinion on the case's merits, the court deemed it just to grant bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The bail was allowed, with the petitioner required to execute a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000 and provide two sureties of Rs. 50,000 each. Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, the court waived the requirement for sureties, allowing release upon furnishing the personal bond by a specified date.The court imposed conditions for the petitioner's release, including appearing in court as required, not leaving the country without permission, and cooperating with investigating agencies. Failure to comply would allow the State and GST Department to seek bail cancellation. The judgment balanced the petitioner's right to bail with the need for ensuring compliance and preventing potential interference with the case.