Sumit Dutta S/O Shri Vinod Dutta vs. Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, Sumit Dutta, a partner in M/s Veto Merchandise, filed a fourth bail application before the Rajasthan High Court. He is currently lodged in Central Jail, Jaipur. The case involves a complaint filed by the Superintendent (Anti Evasion), Central Goods & Services Tax and Central Excise Commissionerate, Jaipur, for an alleged offense under Section 132(1)(i) read with Section 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner has been in custody for approximately one year and four months, and the matter is at the pre-charge evidence stage. His third bail application was previously rejected by the High Court on October 28, 2021.

Held

The Court dismissed the fourth bail application. It reasoned that the petitioner's third bail application was rejected on merits by the same Court on October 28, 2021. The Court found that, apart from the additional period of custody, there was no change in circumstances that necessitated entertaining the present fourth bail application. The ratio decidendi is that a subsequent bail application will not be entertained if there is no material change in circumstances after the previous application was rejected on merits. However, the Court directed the trial court to expedite the disposal of the case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. given the period of custody and the stage of the proceedings, considering the maximum sentence prescribed under the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been in custody for about one year and four months. The case is still at the pre-charge evidence stage, and the maximum sentence provided under the Act is five years. Therefore, the petitioner should be granted bail. Respondent's Arguments: The counsel for the Union of India opposed the bail application, arguing that the petitioner's third bail application was rejected by this Court on October 28, 2021, and there has been no change in circumstances since then that would warrant entertaining a fourth bail application.