2020 (8) TMI 40 - HC - GST

Granting of Bail in GST Act Offenses Case

Amit Bothra, Ashok Dagar Versus State of MP

Amit Bothra, Ashok Dagar Versus State of MP - 2020 (40) G. S. T. L. 434 (M. P.) Issues:1. Bail application under section 439 of the Cr.P.C. in a case related to GST Act offenses.Analysis:The case involved two petitions arising from the same crime number under the GST Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners were involved in clandestine clearance of Pan Masala without paying GST, leading to a significant tax evasion. The petitioners were partners in a firm that was found to have evaded GST to the tune of crores. The defense argued that the firm was registered and paying GST regularly, refuting the allegations of tax evasion. The defense also claimed that the petitioners' statements were obtained under pressure and retracted later. The defense highlighted the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their business operations, leading to delays in paperwork and submission of invoices.The defense further argued that the petitioners were falsely implicated, with no concrete evidence linking them to the alleged offenses. They contended that the officials had not followed proper procedures for arrest, recording statements, and search and seizure. The defense emphasized that the petitioners were willing to pay any assessed deficit and had already deposited a substantial amount. They also stated that the petitioners had no connection with certain individuals mentioned in the case.The prosecution, on the other hand, asserted that the petitioners had a significant role in a syndicate involved in clandestine manufacturing and sale of Pan Masala, causing substantial losses to the exchequer. They presented evidence suggesting the petitioners' involvement in illegal activities and their nexus with other wrongdoers in the syndicate. The prosecution argued that the petitioners' release would hamper the ongoing investigation, as more evidence was expected to surface. They highlighted the seriousness of the offenses, especially during the pandemic-induced lockdown, and the potential threat posed by the petitioners to the investigation and witnesses.After hearing both parties and examining the evidence, the court granted bail to the petitioners. The court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, specific evidence collected, and other facts of the case. The bail was granted subject to certain conditions, including cooperation with the trial, non-involvement in criminal activities, and submission of passports if any. The court emphasized that the bail was granted without commenting on the merits of the case, allowing the petitioners to be released on a personal bond with specified sureties.