Yash Pal Jindal vs. State Of Ut Chandigarh

Facts

The petitioner, Yash Pal Jindal, filed a petition under Section 439 Cr.PC seeking bail pending trial in FIR No. 385 dated 13.12.2019, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B, and 471 of the IPC at Police Station Central Sector-17, Chandigarh. The petitioner was alleged to have issued fake bills in exchange for a 5% commission on GST refunds claimed by traders. The prosecution alleged he was part of a group that fraudulently obtained large amounts of GST refunds. The petitioner has been in custody since 10.12.2022 and argued he was not involved in the crime, did not directly benefit from government departments, and was not required for further investigation. The respondent, UT, Chandigarh, argued the petitioner was involved in a heinous crime and a similar case.

Held

The High Court allowed the petition for bail pending trial. The Court noted that the petitioner had been in custody since 10.12.2022 and that it was not disputed that he was not required for further investigation. Without expressing any further opinion on the merits of the case, the Court ordered the petitioner's release on bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds/surety to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. The ratio decidendi appears to be that prolonged custody without the need for further investigation, coupled with the absence of dispute regarding these facts, warrants the grant of bail, even in cases involving allegations of financial fraud, pending a full trial.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, Yash Pal Jindal, is entitled to be released on bail pending trial in FIR No. 385 dated 13.12.2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120-B, and 471 of the IPC, considering his alleged involvement in issuing fake GST refund bills for commission. Petitioner's contentions: The case against the petitioner is fabricated and he is not involved. He did not receive any direct benefit from the GST department. He has been in custody since 10.12.2022 and is not required for further investigation, thus deserving bail. Respondent's contentions: The petitioner is involved in a heinous crime as part of a group that fraudulently obtained significant GST refunds. He is also involved in another case of a similar nature. However, it is not disputed that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.12.2022 and is not required for further investigation.