2023 (8) TMI 1697 - HC - Indian Laws

Entitlement to ad-interim bail in Income Tax prosecution granted on parity with co-accused; bond and sureties imposed.

Applicants accused in alleged Income Tax and related IPC offences were held entitled to ad-interim bail on the parity principle. The High Court noted the ... Entitlement to ad-interim bail on parity with co-accused - Income Tax Department has made a complaint u/s 200 of the Cr. P.C. for the offence punishable u/s 276 (C) (1)/277/278 r/w Section 278B/278E of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 120B/191/199/200/204 of the IPC - HELD THAT:- Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that as the concerned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has already returned the complaint to be filed before the competent Court of Shyna territorial jurisdiction though the said finding has been challenged by the Income Tax Department before the High Court of Delhi, but as on today, no Scheduled offence has been registered and further considering that the other co-accused has already been enlarged on ad-interim bail by this Court and the case of the present applicants is identical to the said co-accused, therefore, on the ground of parity, this Court is of the considered view that the applicants – Nitesh Purohit and Trilok Singh Dhillon are also entitled to be released on ad-interim bail. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. It is directed that on each of them furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs only) with two equivalent sureties of Rs. 5 Lacs each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court or CJM or Remand Magistrate (whomsoever is available), the present Applicants – Nitesh Purohit and Trilok Singh Dhillon be released on ad-interim bail. Issues: Whether applicants are entitled to ad-interim bail pending trial when the complaint has been returned for filing before competent jurisdiction, no scheduled offence has been registered against them and a co-accused has already been granted ad-interim bail.Analysis: The Court considered the status of proceedings where the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had returned the complaint to be filed before the competent territorial court and noted that, as on date, no scheduled offence cognizance had been recorded. The Court took into account interim orders in related proceedings, the fact that one co-accused had been enlarged on ad-interim bail by this Court, and parity between the applicants' cases and that of the co-accused. The Court also noted interlocutory and protective orders in connected matters restraining coercive action and that challenges to the return-of-complaint order were pending before other fora, but emphasized that the present application was confined to grant of ad-interim bail.Conclusion: The applications for ad-interim bail are allowed and the applicants are directed to be released on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 5,00,000 with two sureties of like amount and complying with conditions set by the Court. The relief is granted in favour of the applicants.