Galib Mirzaul Ali @ Riki vs. The State Of Assam

Held

The Court rejected the petitioner's second bail petition. The primary issue was whether the IPC sections were wrongly invoked for what the petitioner claimed was GST evasion. The Court, after considering the submissions of both sides and reviewing the case diary, found that the case involved more than just tax evasion. The State successfully argued that the facts indicated forgery and cheating. Specifically, the Court noted the petitioner's alleged involvement, along with others, in inducing Sofiqul Ali to hand over his PAN card, which was then used by Asif Hussain to register a GST account. This account was subsequently used fraudulently by the accused. The Court found that the manipulation of documents and their use for cheating were made out against the accused, as previously noted by the Court. Therefore, the Court concluded that there was no merit in the present bail petition, and it was dismissed. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided.

Facts

The petitioner, Galib Mirzaul Ali @ Riki, filed a second bail petition under Section 438 of the CrPC seeking pre-arrest bail in Sivasagar P.S. Case No. 1015/2021. The case was registered under Sections 120(B)/420/468/471 of the IPC. The petitioner claimed no involvement in the alleged offense and pointed out that other accused had been released on bail. He argued that the case primarily concerned GST evasion, punishable under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which is bailable. Therefore, he contended that registering a case under the IPC was legally improper and not maintainable. The State, represented by the Additional PP, objected, stating the petitioner's complicity was evident from the case diary, and his previous bail prayer was rejected. The State argued it was not a simple tax evasion but involved forgery and cheating, citing specific instances of inducement and fraudulent use of a GST account registered in another person's name.

Key Issues

1. Whether the registration of a case under Sections 120(B)/420/468/471 of the IPC is legally improper and not maintainable when the core issue pertains to GST evasion, punishable under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? (Question of law) Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the entire case revolves around GST evasion, which is a bailable offense under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. He contended that when a matter is covered by a Special Act, initiating proceedings under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) is legally flawed and renders the case non-maintainable. Revenue's Contention: The State argued that the case is not a simple tax evasion but involves forgery and cheating, as evidenced by the case diary. They presented facts indicating the petitioner's complicity with others in fraudulently using a GST account registered in the name of one Sofiqul Ali, which was obtained through inducement and manipulation of documents. They emphasized that the Court had already reviewed the case diary and found sufficient complicity, leading to the rejection of the petitioner's earlier bail prayer.