Shri. Anupam Roy vs. The State Of Nagaland

Held

The Court allowed the petitioner's prayer for pre-arrest bail. The reasoning was based on the petitioner being a well-settled inhabitant of the State, his cooperation with the Investigation Officer despite a physical ailment, and the assessment that he is unlikely to abscond to avoid investigation and trial. The Court found no reason to deny the prayer. The operative directions included conditions that the petitioner must not leave the State without permission, must make himself available when required, must not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence, and must furnish adequate bail and surety bonds if arrested. The petition was disposed of accordingly.

Facts

The petitioner, Shri Anupam Roy, sought pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the CrPC in connection with GR Case No. 565/22, registered at Dimapur East Police Station as FIR No. 0188/22. The FIR was based on a complaint alleging fraudulent availment and utilization of input tax credit against the petitioner's firms. The complaint was filed by Mr. Thekrubizolie Angami on August 21, 2022, and the FIR was registered on August 26, 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 423, and 471 of the IPC. The petitioner, a resident of Dimapur, Nagaland, and a consultant, apprehended arrest and approached the High Court. The judgment notes that the investigation was ongoing and the petitioner had been cooperating.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 of the CrPC, considering the allegations of fraudulent availment and utilization of input tax credit and the registration of an FIR under Sections 419/420/423/471 of the IPC? The petitioner argued that he is a well-settled inhabitant and a known consultant, thus unlikely to abscond. He also submitted that he is undergoing medical treatment and arrest would cause irreparable loss. He assured cooperation with the investigation. The State, through its learned P.P., placed the FIR case CD on record, noting the ongoing investigation and the petitioner's cooperation. The State also acknowledged the petitioner's physical ailment.