Sukhveer Singh vs. State Of U.P.

Held

The Court granted bail to the applicant, Sukhveer Singh. The Court considered the submissions made by the applicant's counsel, noting that the applicant was not named in the FIR and his involvement surfaced only during re-investigation. The Court acknowledged the applicant's contention that as a transporter, he cannot be held responsible for the alleged tax evasion by the issuing companies and that he lacks the means to verify invoice authenticity. The Court also took into account that the applicant has been in custody for approximately two months and that there is no immediate prospect of the trial concluding. Crucially, the State did not present any reasonable apprehension that the applicant would tamper with evidence, delay the trial, or intimidate witnesses. Therefore, without commenting on the merits of the case, the Court opined that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, and adhering to conditions that he shall not tamper with prosecution evidence, shall not pressurize prosecution witnesses, and shall appear on every date fixed by the trial court. The prosecution is at liberty to move for bail cancellation in case of breach of these conditions.

Facts

This is a bail application filed by Sukhveer Singh under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The applicant is accused in Case Crime No. 317 of 2022, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34, 120B I.P.C. at Police Station Kaimganj, District Farrukhabad. The applicant was not named in the initial First Information Report (FIR), and a final report was submitted after the initial investigation. Subsequently, the Circle Officer directed a re-investigation, during which the applicant's name surfaced. The applicant is the proprietor of M/s Durga Transport Company, which transported goods based on transit invoices issued by M/s. Mahakal Enterprises and M/s. Mahesriya Supplier and Processor. The applicant contends that as a transporter, he cannot be held responsible for tax evasion by these companies and lacks the means to verify the genuineness of the invoices. He denies forging invoices, tampering with documents, or evading tax. The applicant has no prior criminal history and has been in jail since June 4, 2023.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant, Sukhveer Singh, is entitled to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 317 of 2022, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34, 120B I.P.C. (which involve allegations of cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy, potentially related to GST evasion). Petitioner's Arguments: The applicant contends he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and his name surfaced only after a re-investigation. He argues that as a transporter, he cannot be held responsible for the alleged GST evasion by the companies that issued the transit invoices (M/s. Mahakal Enterprises and M/s. Mahesriya Supplier and Processor), as he has no means to verify the authenticity of these invoices. He asserts he did not forge any documents or evade tax and has no criminal history. He has been in custody since June 4, 2023, and there is no hope of an early trial conclusion. Revenue/State's Arguments: The learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the applicant's submissions from the record.