Vinay Kumar @ Bauaa vs. State Of U.P.
Original PDF →Facts
The applicant, Vinay Kumar @ Bauaa, seeks bail in a criminal case involving charges under Sections 395, 332, 353, 504, 412, 323, and 120B of the IPC. The FIR alleges that the applicant, along with other accused, illegally released a truck confiscated by GST authorities for illegal transportation of 'Supari'. The truck was seized under the GST Act. The applicant claims innocence, stating he was not named in the FIR and was merely a cleaner of the truck with no knowledge of the goods. He highlights that the main allegations are against other named individuals, and traders involved in tax evasion under the GST Act were not chargesheeted. The owner of the truck has already been granted bail. The applicant has been in jail since August 25, 2021, and has no prior criminal history.
Held
The Court granted bail to the applicant, Vinay Kumar @ Bauaa. While acknowledging the allegations of illegally releasing a truck confiscated by GST authorities for illegal transportation of 'Supari', the Court considered the applicant's submission that he was merely a cleaner and not directly involved in the goods or the alleged tax evasion. The Court noted that the truck owner had already been granted bail. The Court also took into account the applicant's period of incarceration since August 25, 2021, and his lack of criminal history. The Court found that the applicant had made out a case for bail, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. The bail was granted subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, with conditions including not tampering with evidence, not harming the victim, abiding by court orders, attending court dates, not delaying the trial, not indulging in unlawful activities, and not misusing bail. The Court reserved the right to cancel bail upon breach of conditions.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant, as a cleaner of the truck, can be implicated under the IPC sections for the alleged illegal release of goods confiscated under the GST Act, particularly when the primary allegations pertain to tax evasion and illegal transportation of goods, and the truck owner has been granted bail? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Sections 395, 332, 353, 504, 412, 323, 120B IPC and the GST Act). Petitioner's Arguments: The applicant is innocent and falsely implicated. He was not named in the FIR and was merely a cleaner with no connection to the 'Supari' being transported or the alleged tax evasion. The core issue relates to the GST Act, and the applicant's role as a cleaner does not warrant IPC charges. The truck owner has already been released on bail. There is no risk of the applicant fleeing, tampering with evidence, or misusing bail. He has been incarcerated since August 25, 2021, and has no criminal history. Revenue/State's Arguments: The applicant's innocence cannot be decided at the pre-trial stage. There is a likelihood of his involvement in other cases, and he may misuse the liberty of bail if released.
Sections Cited
Section 395, Section 332, Section 353, Section 504, Section 412, Section 323, Section 120B IPC, GST Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Court No. - 36 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2588 of 2022 Applicant :- Vinay Kumar @ Bauaa Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant for enlarging him on bail in Case Crime No. 161 of 2021, under Section 395, 332, 353, 504, 412, 323, 120B IPC, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Fatehpur. As per FIR version, the five accused persons along with some unknown persons as named in the FIR have illegally got the truck in question released from the legal possession of the GST authorities, who have confiscated the aforesaid truck for illegal transportation of Supari under the GST Act. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the matter. It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the FIR. He is simply a cleaner of the truck in question and has got no concern with the goods (Supari) being transported with the truck in question, which has been seized by the GST authorities, as such, he cannot be implicated under the sections of IPC as mentioned in the FIR. It is further submitted that all the allegations are mainly against Anil Kumar Shukla alias Lal Ji Shukla and Ajay Kumar Dwivedi. Remaining three named accused namely DK Jain, Anil Jain and Praveen Kumar Jain are the traders, who have been questioned under the GST Act for tax evasion. They have not been arraigned in the chargehseet. It is further submitted that at the most, a case under GST Act could be made out with respect to the vehicle transporting Supari, that too, against the owner of the vehicle. The present applicant being the cleaner has no concern with it. It is next submitted that truck owner has already been released on bail by this Court vide order dated 24.12.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 52959 of 2021. He further submitted that there is nothing on record to demonstrate or to say conclusively that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, it would, in any way, affect the trial of the case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is in jail since 25.8.2021 and has no criminal history. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudicated at pre trail stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence and there is likelihood of his involvement in other case. In case he is released on bail, he may misuse the liberty of bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Vinay Kumar @ Bauaa be released on bail in the aforesaid case, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
The applicant will abide by the orders of the Court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. In case of breach of the conditions mentioned above, the court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. Order Date :- 7.2.2022 vinay
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.