TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 361
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Taxation Inspector (Sale Tax), Ward-5, Panipat, Plot No.179, Sector-25, Part-II, HUDA, Panipat vide office memo No.3539/TOI (Ward-) dated 17/08/2020 had filed a complaint for registering FIR against M/s Khushi Enterprises, Address Shop No.253, Ground Floor, Sector-12, Panipat, GSTIN-06BRSPA6939C1ZP and others, on the allegations that : "M/s Khushi Enterprises GSTIN- 06BRSPA6939C1ZP had got itself registered at Shop No.253, Ground Floor, Sector-12, Panipat. During the inquiries, the given address was visited but no such firm was found functioning at the address. Taxpayer has uploaded photo and other details for taking registration at GST common portal. Therefore, the proprietor of the firm Smt. Atony Amutha Rani P was trace and she was summoned u/s 70 HGST Act 2017. She replied the summons through email and also sent reply through registered post. She disclosed that she is a school teacher at Jegan Matha Matric Hr. Sec. School in Trichy, Tamil Nadu and she does not run any business in her name. She further clarified that someone had misused her documents. Therefore, M/s Khushi Enterprises GSTIN-06BRSPA6939- CIZP (taxable person) and others have got itself ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the enquiry by the police on the verification of the above said documents and enquiry from the concerned person it has been ascertained that a. That the ID of mobile No 8929117540 was found in the name of Akash Kumar S/o Ram Dayal, R/o House No.1-1896, Street No.22, Ratiya Marg, Sangam Vihar, Pushpa Bhawan, South Delhi and on enquiry he had stated on 24/06/2021 that the Aadhaar Card used in registration of the said firm belonging to him but he had never signed the said Aadhar Card and the PAN card used in the said firm is not belonging to him and the photo depicting on the prepaid customer application form of mobile No.8929117540 does not belong to him and the alternate No 89291-18149 of the said mobile number also not belonging to him and he further said that his documents have been prepared and misused by someone in registration of M/s Khushi Enterprises and he had further stated that the copy of his Aadhaar had been taken by co-accused Rakesh Purl on the assurance of providing loan. b. That the above said gmail id [email protected] was found register on the above said mobile No.8929117540. c. That no shop No.253 was found exists on enquiry from Se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rial evidence was sufficient with the police to arrest the petitioner, co-accused Dinesh Raj and Rakesh Puri in this case. iv. That the petitioner and co-accused Rakesh Puri had been arrested by the police on 04/08/2021 and on interrogation they had suffered their separate disclosure statements admitting therein the manner in which they had committed the subjected crime in conspiracy and connivance with each other. The relevant part of the disclosure statement of the petitioner, stating therein his role in the crime, is as under:- "I used to do the work of picking garbage in MCD Delhi. Rakesh Puri S/o Late Shyam Sunder Puri is residing in our colony in House No E-21, Partap Nagar, Metro Station, P.S. Gulabi Bagh North Delhi. I had acquaintance with him since the year 2018 Rakesh lured me to provide IDs to him and he will get open a firm M/s Khushi Enterprises on my name and for this work he will give Rs 40,000/- to me through Dinesh Raj. I had come in the sweet words of Rakesh Puri because I was in dire need of money. Due to greed, I had given my Aadhar Card, PAN card and my photo to Rakesh Puri and my said documents were given by Rakesh Puri to Dinesh Raj S/o Nar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e dealt with co-accused Rakesh Puri, Dinesh Raj and Vishal Bansal and the petitioner does not figure anywhere in the business dealings. Admittedly, there is no other case pending against the petitioner Arjun alias Muggu. He further submits that so far as Rakesh Puri is concerned the allegations qua him are based upon confessional statements made by co-accused including Arjun and the same cannot be read against the petitioner-Rakesh Puri. It has been further asserted that the main thrust of the complaint against the petitioners w.r.t. Evading tax and of having violated the provisions of GST Act yet no complaint has been filed under the provisions of GST Act. 4. Per contra, Ld. State Counsel submits that Rakesh Puri is a habitual offender and has four more cases pending against him for similar offences in FIR No.626 dated 25th of June, 2019, FIR No.732 dated 28th of July, 2019, FIR No.630 dated 25th of June, 2019 and FIR No.337 dated 20^th of June, 2020, all are registered at Police Station Chandni Bagh, Panipat. However, he does not dispute the fact that the investigation in the present case stands concluded and the Challan stands presented. 5. I have heard counsel for the par....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....20) 13 SCC 791, after taking note of the earlier decisions governing the field. The gravity of the offence, the object of the Special Act, and the attending circumstances are a few of the factors to be taken note of, along with the period of sentence. After all, an economic offence cannot be classified as such, as it may involve various activities and may differ from one case to another. Therefore, it is not advisable on the part of the court to categorise all the offences into one group and deny bail on that basis. Suffice it to state that law, as laid down in the following judgements, will govern the field:- Precedents P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement, (2020) 13 SCC 791: 23. Thus, from cumulative perusal of the judgments cited on either side including the one rendered by the Constitution Bench of this Court, it could be deduced that the basic jurisprudence relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial. However, while considering the same the gravity of the offence is an aspect which is required to be kept in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....shment to which the party may be liable, if convicted, also bears upon the issue. Therefore, in determining whether to grant bail, both the seriousness of the charge and the severity of the punishment should be taken into consideration. 40. The grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the discretion of the court. The grant or denial is regulated, to a large extent, by the facts and circumstances of each particular case. But at the same time, right to bail is not to be denied merely because of the sentiments of the community against the accused. The primary purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve the accused of imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him, pending the trial, and at the same time, to keep the accused constructively in the custody of the court, whether before or after conviction, to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the court and be in attendance thereon whenever his presence is required. x xxx xxx 46. We are conscious of the fact that the accused are charged with economic offences of huge magnitude. We are also conscious of the fact that the offences alleged, if proved, may jeopardise the econ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....st exercise this power with a sense of restraint, the decisions of this Court are founded on the basic principle that the due enforcement of criminal law should not be obstructed by the accused taking recourse to artifices and strategies. The public interest in ensuring the due investigation of crime is protected by ensuring that the inherent power of the High Court is exercised with caution. That indeed is one-and a significant-end of the spectrum. The other end of the spectrum is equally important : the recognition by Section 482 of the power inhering in the High Court to prevent the abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice is a valuable safeguard for protecting liberty. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was enacted by a legislature which was not subject to constitutional rights and limitations; yet it recognised the inherent power in Section 561-A. Post- Independence, the recognition by Parliament [ Section 482 CrPC, 1973] of the inherent power of the High Court must be construed as an aid to preserve the constitutional value of liberty. The writ of liberty runs through the fabric of the Constitution. The need to ensure the fair investigation of crime is undoubtedly ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovided is the only criteria, the Courts would not be balancing the Constitutional Rights but rather recalibrating the scales of justice." 9. In Anil Kumar versus State of Punjab, 2013(3) RCR (Criminal) 854 it was held:- "xx xx xx 9. The latest judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners is of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dipak Shubhashchandra Mehta (supra) wherein the entire law has held as under: - "18. The Court granting bail should exercise its discretion in a judicious manner and not as a matter of course. Though at the stage of granting bail, a detailed examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case need not be undertaken, there is a need to indicate in such orders reasons for prima facie concluding why bail was being granted, particularly, where the accused is charged of having committed a serious offence. The Court granting bail has to consider, among other circumstances, the factors such as a) the nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence; b) reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dividual and the interest of the society in general. In our view, the reasoning adopted by the learned District Judge, which is affirmed by the High Court, in our opinion, a denial of the whole basis of our system of law and normal rule of bail system. It transcends respect for the requirement that a man shall be considered innocent until he is found guilty. If such power is recognized, then it may lead to chaotic situation and would jeopardize the personal liberty of an individual. This Court, in Kalyan Chandra Sarkar Vs. Rajesh Ranjan- (2005) 2 SCC 42, observed that "under the criminal laws of this country, a person accused of offences which are non-bailable, is liable to be detained in custody during the pendency of trial unless he is enlarged on bail in accordance with law. Such detention cannot be questioned as being violative of Article 21 of the Constitution, since the same is authorized by law. But even persons accused of nonbailable offences are entitled to bail if the Court concerned comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against him and/or if the Court is satisfied by reasons to be recorded that in spite of the existence o....