TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (8) TMI 831
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a "proper officer" under the provisions of Uttarakhand Goods and Services Act, 2017 and authorized to file the complaint preferred a complaint on 18.12.2023 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, which was registered as a Complaint Case No. 818/STB/RDP/03/03/2023, against the present applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 132 (1) (b), 132 (1) (c) and 132 (1) of Uttarakhand Goods and Service Tax Act/The Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. 3. Before filing the said complaint, the competent authority, Commissioner State Tax, Uttarakhand in exercise of powers conferred upon him under Section 132 (6) of the Uttarakhand GST Act, has accorded sanction for prosecution. 4. The allegations as alleged in the complaint is that two complaints were received on 26.02.2021 and 12.08.2021 with the allegation that huge number of shell firms have been registered and operated by various persons in Jaspur area of District Udham Singh Nagar and these persons have been indulged in issuance and selling of fake invoices of 'wood swan'/'timber' to different buyers within the State as well as outside the State on commission basis without causing actual supply o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the financial records of such shell firms formulated, operated and purchased by this person, namely, Mohd. Shahnawaz Hussain, the applicant herein. 9. A search and seizure operation was also conducted on 04.03.2023, but before the search this person ran away after locking his house. Subsequently, the house was sealed in the presence of Sub Divisional Magistrate (SDM), Jaspur and then he approached to this Court and preferred writ petition being WPMS No. 730 of 2023 through his father against the sealing order but the same was dismissed by the High Court on 17.03.2023 with a direction to the applicant to present before the Special Investigation Branch within 48 hours. 10. Thereafter, the house of the applicant was searched on 15.05.2023 and during search huge number of documents, and devices relating to fake firms which includes: cell phones, SIM cards, blank and filled invoices, pre-signed cheque books, unsigned cheque books and cheque leafs, bank pass book, bank letters, sign boards of different fake firms, stamp of fake firms, E-way bills, IDs of different person, copy & booklets of fake firms, Mandi samiti passes along with some digital instruments like credit cards, ATM c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ith rigorous imprisonment of 3 years for keeping and using of fake stamp of different department i.e. Mandi Sales Tax, Forest department etc., fake bills, fake bilties to evade value added tax for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 472 IPC by judgment and order dated 11.12.2013 passed by trial Court in Criminal Case No. 1774 of 2012, which was confirmed by Additional District and Sessions Judge on 06.07.2018 which has been assailed in Criminal Appeal No. 287 of 2013. 14. After receiving the objection, the said application was withdrawn by the applicant on 22.02.2024. Thereafter, Second Bail Application No. 359 of 2024 was preferred by the applicant on 27.02.2024 before the learned Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar for seeking regular bail and the same was allowed on 05.03.2024. 15. Thereafter, the complainant/respondent No. 2 preferred a Miscellaneous Application, registered as Miscellaneous Application No. 87 of 2024 for the purposes of seeking cancellation of bail of the applicant which was granted to him by order dated 05.03.2024. 16. In the said application several grounds have been taken and one of the ground which is reflected from para 6 of the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the same is barred by Section 362 of Cr. P.C. and only the superior Court can cancel the bail. 23. In response to this, Mr. G.S. Sandhu, learned Additional Advocate General/Senior Counsel assisted by Bhaskar Chandra Joshi, learned A.G.A. vehemently argued that in the First Bail Application there was no disclosure about the criminal history as well as the disclosure about the order passed by the Trial Court in which the present applicant was convicted and this fact was disclosed by way of an objection in the First Bail Application on 07.02.2024. He further submits that after withdrawal of the First Bail Application on 22.02.2024 immediately after five days on 27.02.2024 the Second Bail Application has been moved but again he has not disclosed about criminal history and procured the bail by suppressing the material facts by withholding the same intentionally and also by misleading the Court. 24. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that admittedly at the time of filing of Second Bail Application, again the applicant has not disclosed about the criminal history though this fact was very well within his knowledge since the criminal history of the applicant was disclosed b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... judges bench of this Court [authored by one of us (Hima Kohli, J)] has spelt out the considerations that must weigh with the Court for interfering in an order granting bail to an accused under Section 439 (1) of the CrPC in the following words: "24. As can be discerned from the above decisions, for cancelling bail once granted, the court must consider whether any supervening circumstances have arisen or the conduct of the accused post grant of bail demonstrates that it is no longer conducive to a fair trial to permit him to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during trial [Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana, (1995) 1 SCC 349 : 1995 SCC (Cri) 237]. To put it differently, in ordinary circumstances, this Court would be loathe to interfere with an order passed by the court below granting bail but if such an order is found to be illegal or perverse or premised on material that is irrelevant, then such an order is susceptible to scrutiny and interference by the appellate court."" 27. As per the arguments, as advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, two issues are required to be decided. The first issue is whether the present applicant procured the bail b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....present applicant was dealt with by the Court while granting the bail and therefore, this ground is not available for the prosecution to move an application for cancellation of bail. 32. This Court is not convinced with the argument as advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, particularly, when the applicant has not approached with clean hands to the trial Court while seeking bail. The question is if he has moved the First Bail Application, wherein the objections were called and the objections were filed by disclosing the criminal history of the applicant, then why he has not pressed the First Bail Application. Furthermore, even if he has not pressed First Bail Application, why he has not disclosed the criminal history in the Second Bail Application. Thus, this aspect clearly reveals that the present applicant made all possible efforts to procure the bail by misrepresenting as well as by suppressing material facts. Such a conduct of the applicant, seeking regular bail without disclosing the material facts, about the criminal history and the facts about his conviction clearly reveals that he procured the bail by way misrepresentation and in such an eventuality, the same....