Case Law Details
Abdul Shaji Vs Commissioner of Central Tax And Central Excise (Kerala High Court)
Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was granted to the person accused of non-payment of GST to the tune of Rs 17.53 Crores and non-filing of GSTR 3B returns as it was settled position that the applicant apprehending arrest need not be made an accused in a crime to seek the relief of anticipatory bail and it was sufficient in case he succeeded in establishing that his apprehension of arrest was reasonable.
Held: Applicant apprehended arrest for an offence of alleged non payment of GST to the tune of Rs 1 7.53 Crores and non -filing of GSTR 3B returns for the period from October onwards. The proprietor of M/s A.R. Agencies, Shri. R, and his primary colluder, Shri. Abdul Saleem were proceeded against and their business and residential premises searched. Both of them were arrested and remanded to judicial custody. When questioned, Abdul Saleem stated that he had shared the GST login credentials of M/s A.R. Agencies with the applicant and it was the applicant who had filed the GSTR-I returns for A.R Agencies. It was also contended that the applicant had prepared GST invoices valued at Rs. 348.7 crores using the credentials of the Agency. Accordingly, search of the applicant’s residence was also conducted. Certain blank cheques and documents which were incriminating were recovered from his house. He was not present therefore, a summons was sent to him under Section 70 of the CGST Act, directing him to appear before the Superintendent of Central Tax and Central Excise with the relevant documents. Applicant stated that he was innocent and had nothing to do with M/s A.R Agencies, and did not even know its proprietor Rajoob. He admitted of having acquaintance with Abdul Saleem. Applicant stated that he had no business at present, and was not having any GST registration. It was held that the applicant had not yet been made an accused and no concrete evidence sufficient either to implicate him as an accused or proceed against him had been collected. Applicant had nothing to do with the Agency and had not gained any income from that business. His Bank accounts were available for scrutiny, and the applicant was willing to cooperate by producing those documents. His custodial interrogation may not be necessary under the circumstances. Applicant’s apprehension of arrest was reasonable, because Abdul Saleem, who was also not a proprietor, had been arrested. It was settled position that the applicant apprehending arrest need not be made an accused in a crime to seek the relief of anticipatory bail. Its was sufficient in case he succeeded in establishing that his apprehension of arrest was reasonable. Thus, the applicant was entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail. The bail application was allowed and the applicant was directed to appear before the investigating officer within three weeks. He was directed to cooperate with the investigation and produce all documents called for. After interrogation, in the event of his arrest, he should be released on bail on execution of a bond for Rs 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) with two solvent sureties each for like sum to the satisfaction of AO, and on further conditions that he should appear before for investigating officer as and when called for, and shall refrain from tampering with evidence or witnesses.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER of KERALA HIGH COURT
Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
