Madhav Gopaldas Shah vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court held that the applicant is entitled to regular bail. The Court considered the applicant's period of incarceration (since December 30, 2018) and the maximum sentence that could be imposed. It noted that the applicant's role appeared restricted compared to co-accused. The Court also considered the submission that the applicant was young, pursuing studies, and acted under the instructions of a co-accused without deriving personal financial gain. The Court found that the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, despite instructions from the Investigating Officer, could not bring on record any special circumstances against the applicant. Relying on the principles laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, the Court opined that it was 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 acting injuriously to the prosecution, surrendering his passport, not leaving the State without permission, marking presence before the police station monthly, and furnishing his residential address. The trial court was cautioned not to be influenced by the preliminary observations made by the High Court.

Facts

The applicant, Madhav Gopal Das Shah, filed an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking regular bail. The application was filed in connection with a case registered by the Chief Commissioner of State Tax, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad, for offenses punishable under Section 69(1) of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The applicant had been in custody since December 30, 2018. The prosecution opposed the bail application, citing the nature and gravity of the offense. The applicant argued that he was young, pursuing Chartered Accountancy studies, employed under a co-accused, and acted under instructions without personal financial gain.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant, Madhav Gopal Das Shah, is entitled to regular bail considering his role in the alleged GST scam, the period of incarceration, and the maximum sentence prescribed under Sections 69(1) of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that his role was limited compared to co-accused, he was young and pursuing studies, and acted under instructions. He contended that he did not derive any financial gain. The petitioner relied on the principle laid down in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, [2012] 1 SCC 40, for grant of bail. The respondent-State, through the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the grant of bail, emphasizing the nature and gravity of the offense and the alleged involvement of the applicant as a mastermind in a large-scale bogus billing scam involving crores of rupees, causing significant loss to the government exchequer.