Mulayam Singh vs. State Of U.P.

Facts

This case involves a bail application filed by Mulayam Singh (the applicant) under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant is seeking release in Case No. 02 of 2021, registered for offences under Sections 132(1)(B), 132(1)(c), and 131(1)(I)(c) of the GST Act, 2017, at the D.G.G.I. Meerut Zonal Unit. The applicant's bail application was previously rejected by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Meerut, on January 19, 2021. The applicant was arrested on January 6, 2021, and has been in custody since then. He was released on parole on May 26, 2021, due to the Supreme Court's order concerning COVID-19 contagion. The Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI) opposed the bail application.

Held

The Court allowed the bail application of Mulayam Singh. The Court prima facie observed that the applicant was arrested without sufficient reason to believe or satisfaction, that the alleged offences are punishable up to 5 years imprisonment, that no GST recovery notice was issued, and that taxes/penalties had not been ascertained. It was also noted that the offences are compoundable and triable by a Magistrate. The Court considered the totality of facts and relied on several Supreme Court judgments regarding bail, including State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr. The Court granted bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and sureties, with conditions including not inducing witnesses, not intimidating prosecution witnesses, appearing on fixed dates, filing an undertaking against adjournment, remaining present in court, and not indulging in criminal activity. The trial court was directed to conclude the trial expeditiously. The observations were limited to the bail application and did not express an opinion on the merits of the case.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering his status of custody and the nature of the alleged offences under the GST Act, 2017? The applicant argued that he is innocent and was falsely implicated. He contended that his arrest was made without sufficient reason to believe or satisfaction as required by law. He further submitted that the alleged offences are punishable with imprisonment up to 5 years, are compoundable, and triable by a Magistrate. Crucially, he argued that no notice for GST recovery had been issued, and taxes/penalties had not been ascertained, making his arrest illegal. He also highlighted that he has been in custody since January 6, 2021, and has appeared before the trial court on every date, relying on the definition of 'custody' from Black's Law Dictionary and Supreme Court judgments like Satender Kumar Antil and Sundeep Kumar Bafna. The Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI) argued that the applicant is not in judicial custody as he was released on parole on May 26, 2021. They contended that a bail application can only be considered if the applicant is in custody. The DGGI also expressed apprehension that the applicant might indulge in similar activities and misuse liberty if released on bail.