TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1683
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmits that during the course of investigation, the Investigating Agency had ample opportunity to apprehend/arrest the petitioner but no steps in this regard were taken and the complaint was filed against the petitioner for the above stated offences. Counsel submits that the learned Magistrate vide impugned order dated 11.03.2025 has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the above stated offences and has issued arrest warrants straightaway to procure the appearance of the petitioner. Counsel submits that no such arrest warrants have been issued against the petitioner at the initial stage of the investigation proceedings as the petitioner was ready and willing to appear before the trial Court. Counsel submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that of evading tax amounting to Rs. 6 Lakhs only, hence, under these circumstances, arrest of the petitioner is not required and the impugned order passed by the Court below be quashed and set aside. Counsel further submits that directions be issued to the Court below to summon the petitioner through summons or bailable warrants. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and he has been summoned through arrest warrants. By way of filing this petition, the petitioner has made a prayer for conversion of the arrest warrants into bailable warrants. Meaning thereby that the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail in the form of warrants. Serious allegations of tax evasion of crores of rupees have been levelled against the petitioner. 6. A common man of this Country is paying all kinds of taxes including CGST and SGST to the Central and the State Government for development and building of the Nation and the States but the persons like the petitioner are causing obstruction in the development of the Nation as well as the States by creating fake firms and causing huge loss of Rs. 10.65,23,833/- to the public exchequer. Such economic offences committed by accused persons like the petitioner, are required to be dealt with a different approach in the matter of bail. 7. The economic offence, having deep rooted conspiracies and involving causing of huge loss to the public exchequer, needs to be viewed seriously and must be considered as grave offence, affecting the economy of the Nation as a whole and thereby posing serious threat to the financial hea....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n will entail, the character of the accused, circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the accused at the trial, reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with, the larger interests of the public/State and other similar considerations. It has also to be kept in mind that for the purpose of granting bail, the Legislature has used the words "reasonable grounds for believing" instead of "the evidence" which means the Court dealing with the grant of bail can only satisfy it as to whether there is a genuine case against the accused and that the prosecution will be able to produce prima facie evidence in support of the charge. It is not expected, at this stage, to have the evidence establishing the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt." 11. The judgment relied upon by the petitioner in the case of P.C.Purohit (Supra) was passed in ignorance of the judgment passed in the case of Girdhar Gopal Bajaria (Supra). 12. Creation of fake/non-existing Firms with an intent to pass on fake ITC on the basis of alleged supply shown in fake invoices and thereby passing on fake ITC to various beneficiaries and thus eva....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed in issuing non-bailable warrants against the petitioners as the offence for which cognizance has been taken against the petitioners, is an economic offence punishable under Section 3 read with Section 4 of the PML Act and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be held that the order relating to issuance of non-bailable warrants has been passed without taking into consideration the entire relevant facts and circumstance of the case. As per the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Inder Mohan Goswami v. State of Uttaranchal (supra), it is the duty of the trial court that there must be a proper scrutiny of facts and complete application of mind, before non-bailable warrant is issued. It has also been held that there cannot be any straightjacket formula for issuance of warrant, as a general rule, unless an accused is charged with commission of an offence of heinous crime and it is feared that he is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law. Issuance of non-bailable warrant should be avoided, but in this case, coming to a prima facie satisfaction about the commission of offence under Sections 3/4 of the PML Act, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "6. According to the appellants, time was the essence of the contract and respondent no.3 had failed to pay the balance amount by Rs.10,10,650/-. The Sabha had sent a legal notice dated 3.4.1999 (first legal notice) to respondent no.3 to fulfill his contractual obligations under the sale agreement and informing that if he failed to do so, the agreement to sell would stand cancelled and the amount paid as earnest money would be forfeited. In reply to the said notice, respondent no.3 vide his reply dated 5.5.1999 stated that he had not defaulted in payment of the remaining amount. He stated in the reply that as per the agreement the land had to be measured and that he was ready to pay the balance amount once that was done. 7. Pt. Mohan Lal Sharma, the President of the Sabha, expired on 30.8.1999. On 5.1.2000, both the parties i.e. the representative of the Sabha and the representatives of M/s Ahuja Builders met at the site of the disputed land in the presence of Patwari (Revenue Official). The land of old Khasra No.140 and new Khasra Nos.61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68 and part of 89, 90 was measured by the Patwari. The balance land, after adjusting the land given in lieu ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....no.3 was that the appellants in connivance with other persons had sold the part of land situated in Old Khasra No.140 and new Khasra No.89 which had been transferred to them by way of General Power of Attorney. The FIR was registered on 23.4.2003 as Case No.26 of 2003 under sections 420, 467 and 120-B IPC. 14. It may be pertinent to mention that on 27.5.2003, respondent no.3 filed a civil suit in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) against the Sabha bearing Original Suit No.302 of 2003 titled Himmat Rai Ahuja v. Sanatan Dharam Pratinidhi Sabha. In this suit, respondent no.3 prayed for cancellation of sale deed executed by the Sabha in favour of Sunil Kumar and for permanent injunction against the appellants herein restraining them from interfering in his alleged property. Thus, the issues relating to ascertaining the right, title of the land in dispute and also the issue of correct demarcation of land in Khasra No.140 are pending adjudication in a competent civil court. 16. Aggrieved by the filing of the false and incorrect charge-sheet in the court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Rishikesh in Criminal Case No.1728 of 2003 titled State v. Inder Mohan Goswam....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce, i.e., how and when warrants should be issued by the Court? It has come to our notice that in many cases that bailable and non-bailable warrants are issued casually and mechanically. In the instant case, the court without properly comprehending the nature of controversy involved and without exhausting the available remedies issued non-bailable warrants. Personal liberty and the interest of the State 50. Civilized countries have recognized that liberty is the most precious of all the human rights. The American Declaration of Independence 1776, French Declaration of the Rights of Men and the Citizen 1789, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, 1966 all speak with one voice - liberty is the natural and inalienable right of every human being. Similarly, Article 21 of our Constitution proclaims that no one shall be deprived of his liberty except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by law. 51. The issuance of non-bailable warrants involves interference with personal liberty. Arrest and imprisonment means deprivation of the most precious right of an individual. Therefore, the courts have to ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is charged with the commission of an offence of a heinous crime and it is feared that he is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law, issuance of non-bailable warrants should be avoided. 57. The Court should try to maintain proper balance between individual liberty and the interest of the public and the State while issuing non-bailable warrant." 58. In the humble opinion of this court, the Apex Court on analysing the facts of the case of Inder Mohan Goswami (supra) came to the conclusion that the averments made in the FIR do not make out a case for prosecution under Section 420 and 467 IPC. The Apex Court held that criminal prosecution should not be used as an instrument of harassment or for seeking private vendetta or with an ulterior motive to pressurize the accused. The Apex Court further held that it was neither possible nor desirable to lay down an inflexible rule that would govern the exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Apex Court further held that though powers are very wide under Section 482 Cr.P.C. but they are to be exerci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nr. reported in (1987) 2 SSC 364 has considered the nature of economic offences and has held as under:- "5. ........The entire Community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to books. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A disregard for the interest of the Community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the Community in the system to administer justice in an even handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest. The High Court was therefore altogether unjustified in rejecting the application made by the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor invoking the powers of the Court under Section 391 of the CrPC. We are of the opinion that the application should have been granted in the facts and circumstances of the case with the end in view to do full and true justice. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 792/2020, however, the said SLP was rejected on 10.02.2020 and the order of this Court was upheld. 21. But another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of P.C. Purohit (Supra) has taken a different view in similar situation wherein also cognizance was taken against the accused under Section 3/4 of the PMLA and the accused was summoned through arrest warrants and his arrest warrants were converted into bailable warrants by holding in para 35, 36, 37, 39 and 40as under :- "35. The learned court below while dismissing the application for conversion of non-bailable warrants into the bailable warrants vide impugned order dated 31.01.2025 has observed that after the order of taking cognizance dated 03.08.2024 and issuance of non-bailable warrants for securing the presence of the accused petitioner, there is no substantial change in the matter which could persuade the Court to allow the application filed by the accused petitioner under section 72(2) of the BNSS. Section 72(2) of the BNSS clearly empowers the Court below to cancel every such warrant of arrest issued by the Court under the Sanhita. The petitioner has approached the Court below with the assurance that he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ition filed by the accused petitioner is allowed. The order dated 31.01.2025 passed by the Court of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Jaipur Metro-II in Criminal Misc Case No. 06/2025 (Union of India v. Miraj Products Limited) is quashed and set aside. The application dated 25.09.2024 filed by the accused petitioner under section 72(2) of the BNSS is allowed. The non-bailable warrants issued against the accused petitioner vide order dated 03.08.2024 are converted into the bailable warrants. The accused petitioner shall appear before the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offence), Jaipur within a period of one month from today." 22. On the same issue, conflicting views have been given by different Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, hence, it is difficult for this Court to follow a particular view i.e. either in favour or go against such economic offenders committing offences under the provisions of the PMLA/Customs Act/CGST Act and heinous offences punishable under IPC/BNS. 23. The judicial decorum and legal propriety demands that where a Single Bench or Division Bench does not agree with the decision of the Bench of co-ordinate juris....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of this Court of equal strength. The Apex Court in the case of Central Board Of Dawoodi Bohra Community and Ors. vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr reported in 2005 (2) SCC 673 has held in para 12, which reads as under: "12. Having carefully considered the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the parties and having examined the law laid down by the Constitution Benches in the above said decisions, we would like to sum up the legal position in the following terms :- (1) The law laid down by this Court in a decision delivered by a Bench of larger strength is binding on any subsequent Bench of lesser or co-equal strength. (2) A Bench of lesser quorum cannot doubt the correctness of the view of the law taken by a Bench of larger quorum. In case of doubt all that the Bench of lesser quorum can do is to invite the attention of the Chief Justice and request for the matter being placed for hearing before a Bench of larger quorum than the Bench whose decision has come up for consideration. It will be open only for a Bench of coequal strength to express an opinion doubting the correctness of the view taken by the earlier Bench of co-equal strength, whereup....