TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 50
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....68, 471 IPC added subsequently vide DDR No.6 dated 26.12.2023 GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J . 1. This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two petitions wherein petitioners Jatinder Menro and Mandeep Singh seek grant of anticipatory bail in respect of aforementioned FIR. 2. The FIR came to be lodged pursuant to a complaint made by Assistant Commissioner of Excise, against Sumit Kumar, Sammy Dhiman, Mandeep Dhiman, Sudhir Kumar Verma, Mukesh Gautam, Karan Kumar, Ravi Kaushal and Kushal Kumar alleging therein that the accused, in connivance with each other, had created fake forms and had forged and fabricated fake bills showing inter se transactions of sales and purchases and had uploaded the same on the portal of GST and had furthe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of process of law inasmuch as the petitioners are also being proceeded against in a complaint under Section 132 of Central GST Act 2017, instituted on 30.8.2018, pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, and wherein the petitioners had remained behind bars for more than one year and since the police never took any step to arrest the petitioners during the last 5 years in the instant FIR, necessarily indicating that custodial interrogation was not really required, the alleged recording of disclosure statement of co-accused Sammy Dhiman on 31.10.2023 or addition of offences under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 IPC at this belated stage vide DDR No.9 dated 26.12.2023 is nothing, but a ploy to falsely involve the pe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h is nothing, but a misuse of the said provision particularly when the CGST Act and PGST Act are complete codes in themselves and there are specific provisions with regard to commission of offences by way of falsifying and forging record including bills etc. and in respect of which imprisonment may extend upto 5 years. 9. It has thus, been submitted that when an act of accused constitutes an offence under a special enactment and as well as under IPC, it is the provisions of the special enactment only which will apply and application of provisions of IPC shall stand excluded. 10. Learned counsel in order to hammer forth his aforesaid submissions places reliance upon Sharat Babu Digumarti Vs. State of NCT (2017) 2 SCC 18; Jeewan Kumar R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....T Act or PGST Act, the mere fact that the petitioners had been granted bail in the complaint filed under Section 132 of CGST Act cannot preclude the investigating agency from arresting of the petitioners in the present FIR. 12. This Court has considered rival submissions addressed before this Court. 13. The allegations are broadly to the effect that the petitioners had availed of 'Input Tax Credit' by raising false bills and showing fictitious transactions effected through dummy firms which were actually not in business. Such allegations, on the face of it would certainly attract offence under IPC for allegedly availing 'Input Tax Credit' fradulently on the basis of false documents and sham transactions. At the same time, since fraud ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in some other cases. Some of the said judgments are being briefly referred herein under. 15. Hon'ble Supreme Court in T.S. Baliah v. T.S. Rengachari - AIR 1969 Supreme Court 701, held that where an act or an omission constitutes an offence under two enactments, the offender may be prosecuted and punished under either or both enactments but shall not be liable to be punished twice for the same offence. 16. In State of Rajasthan v. Hat Singh, (2003) 2 SCC 152, Hon'ble Apex Court discussed the doctrine of double jeopardy and section 26 of the General Clauses Act to observe that prosecution under two different Acts is permissible if the ingredients of the provisions are satisfied on the same facts. 17. Hon'ble Supreme Court, in State ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n cases, an accused can be let off with mere penalty. However, since, this Court is presently seized of a petition for grant of anticipatory bail only, there is no need to delve deeper in the legal issue arising out in Clause 26 of General Clauses Act. 20. Admittedly, the petitioners have also been proceeded in a complaint filed against them under Section 132 of CGST Act, which is pending at Ludhiana wherein petitioner-Jatinder Menro remained in custody for 1 year and 8 months and petitioner-Mandeep Singh remained behind bars for about 1 year. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners were not on the run and had associated themselves with the authorities concerned. However, the petitioners now apprehend their arrest on account alleg....