Case Law Details
Naveen Bansal Vs. Commissioner Central Tax (Patiala House court)
In the present case also in the reply itself it has been mentioned that accused has admitted of causing loss to the tune of Rs.7-8 crores to the exchequer. Accused is in custody since 25.03.2021. To decide whether or not admit accused on bail or not abovesaid parameters as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India have to be measured/have to be assessed. The fact that accused was straightaway sent to judicial custody is prima facie indicative of the fact that accused is not required for custodial interrogation. Further, no previous involvement of accused in any similar offence has been brought on record which implies that it is his first offence and he is not a habitual offender. It is also to be seen that accused is not at a flight risk and no submissions have been made to this effect. It has been argued on behalf of respondent department that investigation is still pending and the argument of applicant/accused that complaint shall not be filed within stipulated time is speculative at best. It is correct that it cannot be decided or presumed at this stage that complaint shall or shall not be filed in the stipulated time. However, still it is to be seen that whether or not there is any requirement of accused for investigation as well as whether or not releasing the accused on bail may hamper the investigation. It has been argued on behalf of respondent department that Vikas Bansal, brother of accused is not responding to the process issued by the department and is at large. First, in the reply, voluntary statement of applicant/accused had been relied upon, wherein it is mentioned that applicant/accused had admitted that although his brother is shown as owner of the firm but the entire violation was made by him and his brother has nothing to do with this. Besides this, keeping the accused behind bar will not help the investigating agency in ensuring that other accused responds to the process and cannot be a reason for holding a person behind bar without establishing a direct nexus/any material on record to show any connivance/assistance by the said accused. Therefore, keeping in view the totality of circumstances, the period of incarceration and the fact that accused is not required for any further custodial interrogation, which is otherwise also not possible as 15 days since arrest of accused have already passed, as well as no report of any previous involvement, accused is admitted in bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only), with one surety of equal amount, subject to following terms :
1. That accused shall not leave the country without permission of the court and shall also submit his passport in court as and when the physical hearing is permitted by Hon’ble High Court of Delhi.
2. That accused shall appear before investigating agency as and when required and will also co-operate in investigation.
3. That he shall attend the hearing in compliance of this order and bail bonds so executed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
