Pushp Behl vs. State Of Ut Chandigarh
Facts
The petitioner, Pushp Behl, filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The petitioner was arrested in connection with FIR No. 386 dated 13.12.2019, registered at Police Station Central Sector 17, Chandigarh, for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner declared criminal antecedents, including FIR No. 683 dated 15.8.2020 for similar offences. The petitioner's counsel sought bail with stringent conditions, arguing that pre-trial incarceration would cause injustice. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner's criminal past and the likelihood of re-offending. The petitioner had been in custody since 20.12.2022.
Held
The Court held that the allegations against the petitioner, including fraudulently obtaining a GST number for a non-existent enterprise and evading tax and interest amounting to Rs. 5,10,94,466, prima facie point towards the petitioner's involvement and do not make out a case for bail. The Court noted that the petitioner had been in custody since 20.12.2022, which was less than six months, and directed the petitioner to approach the Court after completing at least six months in custody. The Court also observed that the petition did not provide assurances that the petitioner, as a recidivist, would not indulge in criminal behavior if released. Any further discussion on the merits was refrained from to avoid prejudice. The Court dismissed the bail petition but requested the trial court to expedite the trial by July 31, 2023, subject to the condition that the petitioner does not seek any adjournment.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 CrPC, considering their alleged involvement in fraudulent GST registration and tax evasion, and their criminal antecedents? (Question of law and fact, turning on Section 439 CrPC and principles of bail). Petitioner's contentions: Pre-trial incarceration would cause irreversible injustice and sought bail with stringent conditions. Respondent's (State of UT Chandigarh) contentions: Given the criminal past, the accused is likely to indulge in crime once released on bail.
Sections Cited
Section 439
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CRM-M-7244-2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-7244-2023 (O&M) Reserved on: 12.04.2023 Pronounced on: 24.04.2023
Pushp Behl
... Petitioner(s) Versus State of UT Chandigarh …Respondent (s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:- Mr. Vinod Ghai, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Sandeep Jain, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Sumit Jain, Additional PP, UT, Chandigarh. *** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections 386 13.12.2019 Central Sector 17, Chandigarh 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 120- B, 201 IPC (added later on)
The petitioner, incarcerating upon his arrest in the FIR captioned above, has come up before this Court under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking bail.
In paragraph 29 of the bail application, the accused declares the following criminal antecedents:
Sr. No. FIR No. Date Offences Police Station 1. 683 15.8.2020 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 201 IPC Jagadhri, Yamunanagar
Petitioner's counsel prays for bail by imposing any stringent conditions. The ASHWANI KUMAR 2023.04.28 13:56 I
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.