Vivek Kumar Gupta vs. The State Of Assam Anr

Held

The Court granted pre-arrest bail to the petitioner, Vivek Kumar Gupta, in connection with BI [EO] P.S. Case No. 14/2023. The Court noted that substantial progress had been made in the investigation, and the entire matter revolved around documents that 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, not the GST Act. Considering the progress of the investigation and the materials collected, the Court found custodial interrogation of the petitioner to be unwarranted. The petitioner was directed to be enlarged on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to conditions including availability for interrogation, not inducing witnesses, and not leaving the jurisdiction of the CJM, Kamrup [M] without prior permission. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Vivek Kumar Gupta, sought pre-arrest bail in connection with BI [EO] P.S. Case No. 14/2023, registered under Sections 120B/419/420/468/471 of the IPC. The FIR was lodged by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati. The case involves allegations of M/s Amit Traders, a non-existent entity, purchasing taxable goods worth Rs. 32.35 Cr. with a tax implication of Rs. 5.91 Cr. from M/s Shree Ram Enterprises. M/s Amit Traders allegedly passed on Input Tax Credit (ITC) to other firms. M/s Shree Ram Enterprise is accused of wrongfully claiming ITC of Rs. 116 Cr., with Rs. 5.91 Cr. passed to M/s Amit Traders. The petitioner claims he was implicated by an arrested co-accused and has already provided requested documents to the Investigating Officer (IO). The State opposed the bail, arguing custodial interrogation is necessary to unearth the conspiracy.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, given the allegations of defrauding GST revenue and the registration of the case under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) instead of the GST Act? Petitioner's Arguments: - The petitioner's name is not mentioned in the FIR and he was implicated by a co-accused who has already been granted bail. - The entire matter relates to documents, which have been collected by the IO. - The petitioner has already furnished the requested documents to the IO. - Offences under Section 122 of the GST Act involving amounts below five crore rupees are bailable. - The case has been registered under the IPC to make the offences non-bailable. - The petitioner is ready to cooperate with the investigation. State's Arguments: - The petitioner has not absconded. - Custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary to unearth the conspiracy. - The IO has collected sufficient incriminating materials against the petitioner.