Vivek Kumar Gupta vs. The State Of Assam And Anr

Held

The Court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, Vivek Kumar Gupta. The Court noted that the investigation had made substantial progress and that the entire matter revolved around documents, which had already been collected and seized by the IO. The petitioner had also provided the requested documents. Furthermore, the Court observed that while the allegations pertained to defrauding GST, the case was registered under the IPC and not the GST Act. Considering the progress of the investigation and the materials collected, the Court found that custodial interrogation of the applicant appeared unwarranted. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with a surety of like amount upon arrest, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation, not inducing witnesses, and not leaving the jurisdiction of the learned CJM, Kamrup [M] without prior permission.

Facts

This case involves an application for pre-arrest bail filed by Vivek Kumar Gupta, who apprehends arrest in connection with BI [EO] P.S. Case No. 15/2023. The FIR was lodged by Naba Kumar Deka, Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati. The allegations concern the period between December 2022 and March 2023, where the accused allegedly induced farm proprietors to accept fake invoices from M/s Deepak Enterprise. These invoices were then used to claim illegal tax benefits without any physical movement of goods. The petitioner is alleged to have connived with another individual in furnishing these fake invoices. The petitioner claims his name is not in the FIR and that relevant documents have been provided to the Investigating Officer (IO).

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the allegations of defrauding GST and the registration of the case under the Indian Penal Code (IPC)? The petitioner argued that the matter primarily relates to documents, which have been collected by the IO, and that he has already furnished the requested documents. He contended that the alleged offence of defrauding GST, if below five crore rupees, is a bailable offence under Section 122 of the GST Act. The petitioner argued that registering the case under the IPC was done solely to make the offence non-bailable and expressed readiness to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the petition, arguing that custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary to unearth the conspiracy. The State contended that the IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the applicant and that the applicant has not been absconding.