Anupam Singla vs. State Of Haryana

Held

The Court did not grant the relief of regular bail. However, it issued directions to the respondent-State to make all efforts to examine the remaining prosecution witnesses within three months. The Court also directed the learned trial Court to make all possible efforts to conclude the trial. The petitioner was granted liberty to approach the Court again after three months from the next date of hearing if the prosecution evidence could not be completed within the stipulated period without the fault of the accused. The Court found that the offences were triable by the learned JMIC Gurugram, but the gravity of the financial scam was acknowledged.

Facts

The petitioner, Anupam Singla, sought regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in FIR No. 13 dated 15.01.2019, registered at Police Station Sadar Gurugram, District Gurugram. The FIR was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, and Section 10 of the GST Act, 2017. The petitioner is accused of involvement in a financial scam causing loss to the exchequer by submitting forged GST inputs. The petitioner is also involved in 25 other cases. Out of 36 witnesses, 27 have been examined in the present trial.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. given the nature and extent of the alleged financial scam involving forged GST inputs and the petitioner's involvement in multiple other cases? The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner is involved in a huge financial scam causing loss to the exchequer by submitting forged GST inputs. He also highlighted that the petitioner is involved in 25 other cases and that a significant number of witnesses (27 out of 36) have already been examined. The counsel requested three months for the prosecution to examine the remaining witnesses. The respondent-State, through the learned DAG, Haryana, made a specific statement regarding the examination of remaining witnesses.