Anupam Singla vs. State Of Haryana

Held

The Court did not decide the merits of the bail application. Instead, after some arguments were presented by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner's counsel prayed for the withdrawal of the instant case. The Court allowed this prayer and dismissed the petition as withdrawn at that stage. Therefore, no findings were made on the issues related to the grant of bail or the interpretation of the GST provisions. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition as withdrawn.

Facts

The petitioner, Anupam Singla, filed a petition under Section 483 of BNSS seeking regular bail. The FIR, registered on 28.01.2019, was under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017. Sections 120-B of the IPC were added later. The FIR was registered at Police Station City Bhiwani, District Bhiwani. The petitioner sought bail in connection with the alleged offenses. After some arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner requested to withdraw the petition.

Key Issues

The primary issue before the Court was whether the petitioner, Anupam Singla, was entitled to regular bail in FIR No. 73 dated 28.01.2019. The FIR was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, with Section 120-B of the IPC added later. The petitioner's side argued for the grant of bail, presumably based on the grounds available for bail under the relevant criminal procedure and GST law provisions. The respondent, State of Haryana, would have presented arguments against the grant of bail, likely focusing on the gravity of the alleged offenses, which include cheating, forgery, and offenses under the GST Act related to tax evasion or fraudulent claims. The Court had to decide whether the petitioner had made out a case for regular bail.