Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner alongwith his co-accused is involved in a serious economic offence, resulting in scams, involving crores of rupees, causing loss of Rs. 17.65 crores to the Government exchequer by passing the fraudulent ITC through issuance of invoices without actual supply of any goods. Bail application rejected.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail -- The petitioner was booked as an accused in complaint under Section 132 (1) (b&c) of Act, 2017. It is alleged that the petitioner with the help of other co accused was carrying out fake transactions and created fake firms, had availed of inadmissible input tax credit, besides passing on fraudulent input credits to the buyers on the strength of such invoices running into Rs. 17.65 crores. He was arrested in this case on 12.1.2021. The prosecution failed to complete the investigation within the stipulated period of 60 days. The petitioner was granted bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- with two sureties in the like amount and subject to certain conditions. The petitioner submitted that the conditions imposed are stringent and onerous, as prayed this court that the conditions of heavy surety and bank guarantee/FDR be withdrawn. The court observed that the litigant should adopt a proper mechanism provided under the law for redressal of his grievances, instead of rushing to this Court asking it to interfere in the matter. The court did not observe any reason to interfere with the order, as regards the conditions imposed for release of the petitioner on bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C.
Held that:-The Hon’ble Court dismissed the petition.
Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner alongwith his co-accused is involved in a serious economic offence, resulting in scams, involving crores of rupees, causing loss of Rs. 17.65 crores to the Government exchequer by passing the fraudulent ITC through issuance of invoices without actual supply of any goods. Bail application rejected.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail -- The petitioner was booked as an accused in complaint under Section 132 (1) (b&c) of Act, 2017. It is alleged that the petitioner with the help of other co accused was carrying out fake transactions and created fake firms, had availed of inadmissible input tax credit, besides passing on fraudulent input credits to the buyers on the strength of such invoices running into Rs. 17.65 crores. He was arrested in this case on 12.1.2021. The prosecution failed to complete the investigation within the stipulated period of 60 days. The petitioner was granted bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,10,00,000/- with two sureties in the like amount and subject to certain conditions. The petitioner submitted that the conditions imposed are stringent and onerous, as prayed this court that the conditions of heavy surety and bank guarantee/FDR be withdrawn. The court observed that the litigant should adopt a proper mechanism provided under the law for redressal of his grievances, instead of rushing to this Court asking it to interfere in the matter. The court did not observe any reason to interfere with the order, as regards the conditions imposed for release of the petitioner on bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C.
Held that:-The Hon’ble Court dismissed the petition.