Khem Chand Thathera S/O Shri Nanagram Thathera vs. State Of Rajasthan

Facts

The petitioner, Khem Chand Thathera, is seeking bail in connection with a case registered under Section 132(1)(B) and (C) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He was arrested on August 1, 2022, and is currently in judicial custody. The charge-sheet was filed on September 30, 2022. The petitioner contends he has been falsely implicated and that mandatory provisions regarding his arrest and its continuation under the Act of 2017 have been violated. He also states that no notice for adjudication of tax liability under Sections 73 & 74 of the Act has been served. The petitioner has deposited 10% of the alleged evaded tax amount, and the maximum punishment is five years, with the offences being compoundable. He has no criminal antecedents. The respondent State argues that there are grave allegations of tax evasion amounting to ₹20.83 Crores against the petitioner.

Held

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, Khem Chand Thathera. The decision was heavily influenced by the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Ratnambar Kaushik (supra). The Court noted that the petitioner has been in custody since August 1, 2022, and the charge-sheet was filed on September 30, 2022. Crucially, the petitioner had already deposited approximately 10% of the alleged evaded tax amount. While not expressing an opinion on the merits of the case, the Court found it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The operative directions included releasing the petitioner on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each, subject to compliance with Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. Additionally, the petitioner was directed to deposit his passport with the trial court and not travel abroad without prior permission. The Court did not expressly leave any issues undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail given the allegations of tax evasion and the stage of the proceedings, considering the provisions of Section 132 of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argues for bail based on his false implication, violation of arrest procedures, non-service of adjudication notices under Sections 73 & 74 of the Act, his custody period since August 1, 2022, the filing of the charge-sheet, deposit of 10% of the alleged evaded tax, the compoundable nature of the offences, and his lack of criminal antecedents. He relies on the Supreme Court's judgment in Ratnambar Kaushik versus Union of India. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent opposes the bail application due to the grave allegation of tax evasion amounting to ₹20.83 Crores. They rely on the Supreme Court's judgment in Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy versus Central Bureau of Investigation and judgments of the Rajasthan High Court in Ashok Kumar Sihotiya versus Union of India and Lalit Goyal versus Union of India & Anr., the latter being upheld by the Supreme Court.