Halari Mahammadusman Zubaibhai @ Usmanbhai vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court held that the applicant was entitled to be enlarged on bail. The Court considered the alleged offences under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, which carry a maximum sentence of five years. It noted that the applicant had been in custody for approximately 55 days, the complaint had not yet been filed by the respondent, and no remand had been sought. The Court also observed that the investigation was almost over. Based on these aspects, the Court decided to exercise its discretion to grant bail. The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each. Several conditions were imposed, including not misusing liberty, not acting injuriously to the prosecution, surrendering his passport, not leaving Gujarat without permission, marking presence with the DGGI, co-operating with the investigation, and furnishing his present address. Crucially, the applicant was also required to file an undertaking not to transfer or alienate his immovable properties until the GST amount was ascertained by the authorities. The Court also noted that the trial court should not be influenced by these preliminary observations.

Facts

This is an application for regular bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by Halari Mahammaddusman Zubaibhai @ Usmanbhai. The applicant sought bail in connection with File No. DGGI/AZU/GR.D/12(4)-30/2019-20, registered with the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Zonal Unit, Ahmedabad. The offences alleged are under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The applicant was arrested on July 21, 2019, and at the time of the hearing, approximately 55 days had passed without a complaint being filed. The DGGI had not requested any remand from the Trial Court, and the investigation was stated to be almost over. The applicant's counsel offered an undertaking not to transfer or alienate his immovable properties until the GST amount was ascertained.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, considering the nature and gravity of the offences under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the stage of investigation? Petitioner's Arguments: The applicant's counsel argued that the applicant was ready to provide an undertaking not to transfer or alienate his immovable properties until the GST amount was ascertained by the authorities. He also submitted that the applicant should be enlarged on bail with suitable conditions, considering the nature of the offence and the fact that the investigation was almost complete, with no complaint filed and no remand sought by the respondent. The applicant relied on the fact that he had been in custody for approximately 55 days. Revenue's Arguments: The learned APP and the learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 2 opposed the grant of bail, citing the nature and gravity of the offences.