TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Cement Goods Fraud Case: Anticipatory Bail Granted Due to Lack of Substantial Evidence Under IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 471</h1> <h3>Mukesh Kumar Agrawal Versus State of Chhattisgarh</h3> HC granted anticipatory bail in a case involving alleged transportation and documentation discrepancies for cement goods. Despite prosecution allegations ... Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - evasion of tax - illegal transportation - goods were supposed to be delivered to Mahamaya Hardware, Kusmi, however the Truck driver was going to Dhanwar and on the basis of the same - HELD THAT;- Perusal of the case dairy goes to show that in the case dairy there is a report of Assistant Commissioner, GST, Ambikapur, who has given his report to the Police Station Incharge on 4-5- 2023 wherein it has beer clearly mentioned that invoice of GST is there and tax of Rs.51,798/- has been mentioned, but since it is illegal transportation, therefore, the tax is not valid. It has also been recorded that on physical verification, 700 cement bags were found and both bills confirmed this fact. Considering the material on record and further considering the fact that it is not a case of prosecution that the forged documents have been prepared by the applicant with regard to GST or other invoices and also the fact that no material has been collected by the prosecution so far with regard to commission of offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.,and also considering the fact that this may be a case of violation of GST Act, but from the material collected by the prosecution, prima facie, it is not established that the applicant committed the offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of I.P.C, the benefit of Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. extended to the applicant. The instant anticipatory bail application is allowed subject to conditions imposed. Issues involved:The first bail application filed by the applicant under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Crime No. 33/2023, registered at Police Station- Basantpur, District Balrampur (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.Details of the Judgment:Prosecution's Case:The prosecution alleged that a truck carrying cement was intercepted, and discrepancies were found in the delivery destination compared to the documents. This led to the registration of Crime No. 33/2023 against the applicant for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of I.P.C.Applicant's Defense:The applicant, represented by counsel, argued that he was falsely implicated, had not evaded tax payment, and had proper documentation for the goods being transported. It was stated that the applicant had the authority to sell the cement and had raised invoices accordingly.Arguments by Both Sides:The applicant's counsel contended that the applicant had not committed the alleged offences and should be granted anticipatory bail. In contrast, the State's counsel opposed the bail application, citing clear allegations against the applicant.Assistant Commissioner's Report:An Assistant Commissioner of GST provided a report stating that although tax invoices were present, the transportation was deemed illegal due to discrepancies. Physical verification confirmed the presence of 700 cement bags.Court's Decision:After reviewing the case diary and material on record, the court found no evidence of the applicant preparing forged documents related to GST or other invoices. It was noted that the prosecution had not collected sufficient evidence to establish the commission of the alleged offences. The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. to the applicant.Bail Conditions:The court allowed the anticipatory bail application and directed the applicant to be released on anticipatory bail upon arrest, upon executing a personal bond and surety. The applicant was also required to make themselves available for interrogation, refrain from influencing witnesses, and attend all trial court dates.Conclusion:The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant considering the lack of evidence supporting the alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of I.P.C. The bail conditions were set to ensure compliance with the legal procedures.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
