Smt. Himani Munjal W/O Shri Ankus Munjal B/C Punjabi vs. Union Of INDIA
Held
The Court dismissed the bail petition. The reasoning provided is that a previous bail petition filed by the petitioner on the same grounds was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated September 10, 2018. The Court found no change in circumstances that would warrant interference or grant of bail in the present petition. Therefore, the petition was dismissed. The specific findings on each sub-section of Section 132 of the CGST Act were not detailed as the dismissal was based on the prior dismissal of a bail petition and lack of changed circumstances. The ratio decidendi is that a subsequent bail application will not be entertained if there is no change in circumstances from the previous dismissal on merits. The operative direction was the dismissal of the bail petition.
Facts
The petitioner, Smt. Himani Munjal, filed a criminal miscellaneous bail petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petition relates to Case File No. DGGI/JZU/INV/GR.I/GST/15/18-19 and complaint No. 35/2018, registered by the Senior Intelligence Officer, Goods and Service Tax, Intelligence Directorate, Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur. The offences alleged are under various sub-sections of Section 132(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner is currently confined in Central Jail, Jaipur. The Court notes that a previous bail petition filed by the petitioner was dismissed on merits by the same court on September 10, 2018. The present petition was filed without any change in circumstances.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the allegations under Section 132(1)(B), (C), (D), (F), (I), and (l) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, read with Section 132(1)(i)(iv) with (5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner sought bail under Section 439 CrPC. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the petitioner's counsel beyond the filing of the bail petition. Respondent's Argument: The respondents, Union of India through Senior Information Officer and Union of India through P.P., opposed the bail. The judgment does not record specific arguments made by the respondents' counsel.
Sections Cited
Section 132(1)(B), Section 132(1)(C), Section 132(1)(D), Section 132(1)(F), Section 132(1)(I), Section 132(1)(l), Section 132(1)(i), Section 132(1)(iv), Section 132(1)(5), Section 439
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Judgment 24/10/2018 Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in relation to Case File No.DGGI/JZU/INV/GR.I/GST/15/18-19, complaint No.35/2018 registered at Senior Intelligence Officer Goods and Service Tax, Intelligence Directorate, Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur for offence under Sections 132(1)(B),(C), (D), (F), (I) and (1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 132(1) (i) (iv) with (5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.