Pravinbhai Bhagwanjibhai Tanna vs. State Of Gujarat
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Pravinbhai Bhagwanjibhai Tanna, filed an application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The application pertains to SGST Case No. 02 of 2020, registered before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot, for offences punishable under Section 132(1)(B)(C) of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax, 2017. The petitioner has been in jail since September 22, 2020. The investigation is reported to be complete, and a complaint has been filed. The maximum sentence prescribed for the alleged offences is five years.
Held
The Court allowed the application for regular bail. The reasoning was based on the facts of the case, the nature of the allegations, the gravity of the offences, and the role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail. The Court considered the petitioner's submission that the investigation was complete and a complaint had been filed, and that the maximum sentence was five years. Reliance was placed on the principle that bail is a rule and jail is an exception, as well as the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sanjay Chandra Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation. The Court found it to be a fit case to exercise its discretion to enlarge the applicant on bail. The operative directions included releasing the applicant on bail upon executing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to several conditions, including not misusing liberty, not acting injuriously to the prosecution's interest, surrendering passport, not leaving India without permission, marking presence at the police station monthly for six months, and not changing residence without prior permission. The Court also directed that the trial court should not be influenced by the prima facie observations made in the order.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, given that the investigation is complete and a complaint has been filed, and the maximum sentence is five years? The petitioner argued that since the investigation is complete and the complaint has been filed, there is no further need to detain him. He relied on previous orders of the High Court in Criminal Misc. Appln. No. 22332 of 2018 and Criminal Misc. Application No. 3488 of 2020, which held that bail is made out after the filing of a complaint. The petitioner also pointed out that the maximum sentence prescribed is five years and requested bail with suitable conditions. The respondent-State, through the learned APP, opposed the grant of regular bail, citing the nature and gravity of the offence. However, the learned APP did not dispute the factual position presented by the petitioner nor pointed out any distinguishing factors.
Sections Cited
Section 132(1)(B)(C), Section 439
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Rule. Mr. Dharmesh Devnani, learned APP waives service of Rule for the respondent – State.
The present application is filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for regular bail in connection with File No. SGST Case No.02 of 2020 registered before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot for the offence punishable under Section 132(1)(B)(C) of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax, 2017. 3. Heard Mr. Yogesh Lakhani, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Chandrani, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Dharmesh Devnani, learned APP for the respondent- State through video conferencing.
It is submitted by the learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Lakhani that the applicant is in jail since 22nd September, 2020. It is next submitted that investigation is complete and after completing the investigation, the complaint has been filed. As R/CR.MA/19830/2020 ORDER such, nothing further requires to be found out from the applicant. Mr. Lakhani has placed reliance upon order of this Court dated 20-12-2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Appln.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the respondent - State has opposed grant of regular bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence. However, learned APP does not dispute the above position nor has pointed out any distinction.
Learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties do not press for further reasoned order.
Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and perusing the material placed on record and taking into consideration the facts of the case, nature of allegations, gravity of offences, role attributed to the accused, without discussing the evidence in detail, this Court is of the opinion that this is a fit case to exercise the discretion and enlarge the applicant on regular bail.
Looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the R/CR.MA/19830/2020 ORDER present case, I am inclined to consider the case of the applicant.
This Court has also taken into consideration the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay [2012] 1 SCC 40. 10. Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with File No. SGST Case No.02 of 2020 registered before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall; [a] not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; [b] not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution; [c] surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; [d] not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; [e] mark presence before the concerned Police Station between 1st to 10th day of every English calendar month for a period of six months between 11:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m.; [f] furnish the present address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of this Court; R/CR.MA/19830/2020 ORDER
The authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the lower Court having juri iction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
At the trial, the Trial Court shall not be influenced by the prima facie observations made by this Court in the present order.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. The Registry is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court by email. (VIKRAM NATH, CJ) A. B. VAGHELA/RADHAN
Reproduced from the public record of the Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.