Asish Mandal And Anr vs. The State Of Assam
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioners, Asish Mandal and Kabil Ahmed Barbhuiya, sought pre-arrest bail in connection with Badarpur GRPS Case No. 13/2021, registered under Sections 120(B)/420/379/411/471 of the IPC. The case involved the seizure of 4,680 gunny bags containing 3,85,164 kgs of arecanut at Badarpur Railway Station, transported via Indian Railways. The petitioners claimed ownership of the seized arecanut, producing documents such as GST invoices and e-way bills. However, the investigation report indicated that Asish Mandal, who runs a motor garage, lacked business-related documents for supari trading and his GST registration appeared to be misused by others in a syndicate. Similarly, Kabil Ahmed Barbhuiya's business address was found non-existent, and he could not produce relevant documents. The IO concluded that both petitioners were not the lawful owners of the seized arecanut but were involved in an organized criminal syndicate engaged in illegal smuggling through manipulated documents.
Held
The Court held that the petitioners are not entitled to pre-arrest bail. The reasoning was based on the investigation report which indicated that Asish Mandal, despite claiming ownership, lacked proper documentation for his supari business and his GST registration appeared to be misused by others in a syndicate. The report also suggested that he fronted an organized criminal syndicate involved in illegal supari smuggling through manipulated records. Similarly, Kabil Ahmed Barbhuiya's business address was found non-existent, and he could not produce supporting documents, suggesting his involvement in the organized network of smuggling betel nuts using agents. The Court found sufficient incriminating materials against both accused persons, suggesting their complicity in illegal business through forged and manipulated documents. Therefore, the Court concluded that it was not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail. The bail application was rejected, and the interim order was vacated.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to pre-arrest bail under Section 438 CrPC, considering the allegations of involvement in an organized criminal syndicate engaged in illegal smuggling of arecanut using forged and manipulated documents. Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that they are the lawful owners of the seized arecanut and possess legal documents, including GST invoices and e-way bills, to support their claim. They contended that these documents demonstrate the legality of their transactions and ownership. Revenue's contention: The State, through the Investigating Officer's report, argued that the petitioners are not the legal and lawful owners of the seized arecanut. The investigation revealed that Asish Mandal's GST registration was utilized by others in a supari syndicate, and his business documents were manipulated. Kabil Ahmed Barbhuiya's business address was found non-existent, and he similarly could not produce supporting documents. The State contended that both petitioners are involved in an organized network of smuggling arecanut using forged and manipulated documents, with sufficient incriminating materials found against them.
Sections Cited
Section 438 CrPC, Sections 120B, 420, 379, 411, 471 IPC
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 29.11.2021 By way of this bail application filed under Section 438 CrPC, petitioners, namely, 1) Asish Mandal and 2) Kabil Ahmed Barbhuiya, have sought for pre-arrest bail in the event of their arrest in connection with Badarpur GRPS Case No. 13/2021, under Sections 120 (B)/420/379/411/471 of the IPC. Heard the learned counsel for both the sides. As per the FIR, on 11.09.2021, based on source information that unlawful goods were transported through Indian Railway and the parcel van was supposed to arrive at Badarpur Railway Station. While the said van coming from Dharmanagar reached Badarpur, the Badarpur GRPS halted the van at its destination and seized 4,680 nos. of gunny bags, containing the supari (arecanut), amounting to 3,85,164 kgs. Now, the two petitioners have sought for bail in connection with the aforesaid case claiming to be the owners of the seized arecanut, having legal documents like GST, tax invoice, e-way bills etc. Today, the Case Diary has been produced by the IO, along with his bail objection. On the basis of the investigation so far carried out, the IO in his report, has submitted that the accused Asish Mandal, runs a small motor garage near Dharmanagar Railway Station and he has no documents related to the conduct of his business of supari, like register, accounts book etc. and his GST Registration has been prepared and utilized by some other persons associated in their supari syndicate and they were given commission for the same. It reveals that the accused Ashish Mandal is not the legal and lawful owner of the seized supari, but front-ending an organized criminal syndicate, indulged in illegal smuggling of supari through manipulation of records and documents. The investigation also reveals that document that has been produced in support of his claim are mostly manipulated and whereas, the has no such financial capacity to purchase such huge amount
Page No.# 3/3 of supari (arecanut). Similar is the situation of Kabil Ahmed Barbhuiya. On physical verification, his official address of KA enterprise is found to be non-existent and he could not produce any related documents as that of Ashish Mandal. He is not found to be the legal and lawful owner of the seized supari and he is involved in the organized network of smuggling betel nuts by using agents. Sufficient incriminating materials were found against both the accused persons to suggest their complicity with such illegal business of supari, with a bigger organized network by way of forged and manipulated documents. In view of above, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the present petitioners. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. Interim order passed earlier stands vacated.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.