Vinod Mansukhlal Vadhaiya And Anr. vs. The State Of Maharashtra And Anr.

Held

The Court considered the factual aspects and submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants. It was acknowledged that the applicants might be arrested during the inquiry initiated by the summons. Given the pandemic situation and the need for the applicants to approach the appropriate court for suitable relief, the Court decided to grant protection for a temporary period. The application was not adjudicated on its merits. The Court granted transit anticipatory bail to the applicants for a period of four weeks, allowing them to execute a Personal Release (PR) bond of Rs. 25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount in the event of their arrest in connection with the specified summons. The applicants were also directed to file an affidavit of service. The application was disposed of.

Facts

The applicants, Mr. Vinod Mansukhlal Vadhaiya and Mr. Amit Gordhanbhai Limbasia, sought transit anticipatory bail in connection with summons dated April 1, 2021, March 3, 2021, March 6, 2021, and March 10, 2021. These summons were issued by the Superintendent (Anti-Evasion), CGST, Gandhi Nagar, Preventive Section. The summons indicated an inquiry into evasion of CGST/SGST and contravention of rules. The applicants contended that they might be arrested during the inquiry and, due to the pandemic, required time to approach the appropriate court. The court had previously directed the applicants to serve the respondent, and proof of service was placed on record, though no one appeared for the respondent.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicants are entitled to transit anticipatory bail in connection with the summons issued by the Superintendent (Anti-Evasion), CGST, Gandhi Nagar, under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017, read with other provisions, to enable them to approach the appropriate court for appropriate relief, considering the possibility of arrest during the ongoing inquiry. Contentions: Petitioner/Applicants: Submitted that summons were issued repeatedly and there was a possibility of arrest during the inquiry. They also highlighted the prevailing pandemic situation, necessitating reasonable time to approach the appropriate court for relief. Revenue/State: No arguments were recorded for the respondent State.