Hemant Jain S/O Shri Dinesh Kumar Jain vs. State Of Rajasthan

CRLMB/7934/2022HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02040487202201 July 2022Bench: NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioners, Sumit Bodana, Amul Sharma, and Hemant Jain, are accused in a case registered by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Jaipur Zonal Unit. The allegations pertain to offences under Sections 132(1)(B)(C) and 132(1)(I) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioners have been in judicial custody since April 26, 2022. They have filed bail applications under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. The prosecution has filed an incomplete chargesheet. The petitioners claim they have retracted statements made under Section 70 of the GST Act and that the trial may take a considerable time.

Held

The Court allowed the bail applications. The reasoning was based on considering the contentions put forth by the counsel for the petitioners, the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The Court found it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The operative directions were that the accused-petitioners Sumit Bodana, Amul Sharma, and Hemant Jain shall be enlarged on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge. They are required to appear before the court on all dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so. No issues were expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. considering they have been in custody since April 26, 2022, an incomplete chargesheet has been filed, and they have retracted their statements made under Section 70 of the GST Act, given that the maximum punishment is five years and the trial may be protracted? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioners contend they have been wrongly implicated. They highlight their period of incarceration, the filing of an incomplete chargesheet, the maximum punishment of five years, and the retraction of their Section 70 statements as grounds for bail. They argue that the conclusion of the trial may take a significant amount of time, justifying their release on bail. Respondent's Arguments: The Union of India, through the Public Prosecutor, and the complainant's counsel opposed the bail applications.

Sections Cited

Section 132(1)(B), Section 132(1)(C), Section 132(1)(I), Section 70, Section 439 Cr.P.C.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7408/2022 1. Sumit Bodana S/o Shri Abhay Bodana, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Vardhman Chowk, Nimbahera, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan ( At Present Accused In Judicial Custody And Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) 2. Amul Sharma S/o Shri Ramlal Sharma, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Daulpura, Jawada, Chittorgarh, Rajasthan ( At Present Accused In Judicial Custody And Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioners Versus Union of India, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 7934/2022 Hemant Jain S/o Shri Dinesh Kumar Jain, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 78/79/1-B, Vaishali Nagar, Near Chandar Farm House, Rajpura Road, Kota Rajasthan ( At Present Accused Is In Judicial Custody And Confined In Central Jail Jaipur) ----Petitioner Versus Union of India, Through Public Prosecutor. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajendra Yadav, GA-Cum-AAG, Mr. Siddharth Ranka with Mr. Saurav Harsh HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order 01/07/2022

The present bail applications have been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C arising out of F.No.DGGI/GZU/GR-D/INV/210/2021-22

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-7408/2022] Registered at Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur for the offence(s) under Sections 132(1) (B)(C) and 132(1)(I) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been wrongly implicated in this case. Petitioners are behind the bars since 26.04.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that incomplete chargesheet has been filed against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that maximum punishment in this case is five years. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that petitioners had retracted the statement given by him under Section 70 of GST Act. Conclusion of trial may take long time. So, petitioners be enlarged on bail.

Learned GA-Cum-AAG as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail applications.

Considering the contentions put-forth by the counsel for the petitioners and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court deems it just and proper to enlarge the petitioners on bail.

Accordingly, the bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. are allowed and it is ordered that the accused-petitioners Sumit Bodana S/o Shri Abhay Bodana, Amul Sharma S/o Shri Ramlal Sharma and Hemant Jain S/o Shri Dinesh Kumar Jain, shall be enlarged on bail provided each of them furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial Judge for (3 of 3) [CRLMB-7408/2022] their appearance before the court concerned on all the dates of hearing as and when called upon to do so.

A copy of this order be placed in connected file. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Seema/48-49

Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.