Case Law Details
Sohan Singh Rao Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
It is admitted position that the petitioner and Vinaykant Ameta were Director in M/s Miraj Products Private Limited. As per the prosecution story, they had evaded tax of Rs. 869 Crores. GST department had seized one truck which was being unloaded at their premises. The Hon’ble Apex Court in various pronouncement held that the economic offender should not be dealt as general offender because economic offenders run parallel economy and they are serious threat to the national economy. Case of the petitioner is similar to the Vinaykant Ameta Vs. Union Of India and bail of the Vinaykant Ameta was dismissed by this Court and Hon’ble Apex Court had granted the bail of Vinaykant Ameta on depositing of Rs.200 Crores. So, after considering the submission put-forth by learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the present case and also looking to the seriousness of the offence(s) alleged against the petitioner without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not consider it a fit case to enlarge the petitioner on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. arising out of file No. DGGI/INV/GST/2916/2021-Gr-K-O/o DD-DGGI/RU-Udaipur, relating to offence punishable under Sections 132 (1)(A), (F),(H),(I),(L) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He is a simply Director in the M/s Miraj Products Private Limited. He is behind the bars since 13.01.2022. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that in first complaint, there was not a single word regarding alleged offence against the petitioner. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that in supplementary complaint, only allegation of the offence based on the statement of the petitioner. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner had retracted from the statement. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that the case of the petitioner is similar to the case of Dananjay Singh Versus Union Of India in which this Court has granted bail to the Dananjay Singh. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner also submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court has granted bail to the Vinaykant Ameta. So, as a matter of parity, petitioner be enlarged on bail.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
