Ritesh Surendrabhai Shah vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court held that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on regular bail. The Court considered the period of custody of the applicant since July 21, 2019, the filing of the complaint on September 16, 2019, the submission that no further investigation was pending, and the fact that no remand was sought. The Court also noted that the State could not present any special circumstances against the applicant. Relying on the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court found it a fit case to exercise discretion and enlarge the applicant on bail. The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety of like amount, subject to several conditions including not misusing liberty, not obstructing investigation, surrendering passport, not leaving Gujarat without permission, marking presence monthly, and not changing residence without permission. The Court explicitly stated that the trial court shall not be influenced by these preliminary observations regarding the evidence.

Facts

The applicant, Ritesh Surendrabhai Shah, filed an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking regular bail. The application pertains to an offence registered on July 21, 2019, for alleged acts occurring between 2018-2019, under Sections 132(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The applicant has been in custody since July 21, 2019. A complaint under the GST provisions was filed on September 16, 2019. The applicant argued that no further investigation was required and no remand was sought during the investigation. The State opposed the bail application, citing the nature and gravity of the offence. The learned advocates for both parties did not press for a further reasoned order.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, considering the nature and gravity of the alleged offences under Sections 132(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the period of custody? The petitioner argued that considering the nature of the offence, the applicant should be enlarged on bail with suitable conditions. The petitioner also submitted that no further investigation remained and no remand was sought during the investigation, and highlighted the maximum sentence that could be imposed. The respondent-State, through the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail, citing the nature and gravity of the offence. The State was unable to bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant.