Abhishek Gehlot Son Of Shri Ajay Singh Gehlot vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court allowed the bail application of the petitioner. It acknowledged that the case involves allegations of GST evasion and that a charge sheet has been filed. The Court noted that the co-accused, whose case was similar, had already been granted bail by a coordinate bench. The petitioner has been in custody since December 24, 2021. The Court observed that the case is not of a simple nature and is likely to take time for adjudication by the Magistrate's Court. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, without making any observations on the merits, the Court found the bail application to be worthy of consideration. The petitioner was directed to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of ₹50,000 and two sureties of ₹25,000 each, to the satisfaction of the trial court, and subject to his appearance on specified dates and whenever required, provided there is no other case against him.

Facts

The petitioner, Abhishek Gehlot, is seeking bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He was arrested on December 24, 2021, in connection with a case involving alleged GST evasion amounting to ₹39.93 crores. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner was involved in the creation of fake invoices and the evasion of GST without issuing proper bills or paying the applicable tax. The petitioner contends that he has been arrested without sufficient grounds and that the evidence against him is primarily documentary, which is subject to trial. He also highlights that a co-accused, whose case is similar, has been granted bail by this Court. The investigation and charge sheet have been filed.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner has been arrested without sufficient grounds and whether the evidence against him is merely documentary, requiring adjudication during the trial? 2. Whether the petitioner's alleged involvement in GST evasion of ₹39.93 crores, through the creation of fake invoices and non-payment of tax, warrants his continued detention? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argues that he has been arrested without any basis and that there is no concrete evidence linking him to the alleged offense. He claims that the charges are based on mere conjectures and that the statements recorded under Section 70 of the GST Act, which form the basis of the prosecution's case, have no legal sanctity and can be disowned by the petitioner. He relies on various judicial pronouncements, including CIT vs. M/s. Dhingra Metal Works and Kishore Wadhwani vs. State of M.P., to support his contention that statements alone cannot form the basis for adverse inference against an accused. He also points out that a co-accused with a similar case has been granted bail. Respondent's Arguments: The respondent (Union of India) opposes the bail application, asserting that the petitioner is a beneficiary/proprietor of various firms involved in creating fake invoices and evading GST amounting to ₹39.93 crores. They argue that proceedings have been initiated based on statements recorded under Section 70 of the GST Act, which have been substantiated by evidence, and that the petitioner's alleged tax evasion is proven. They further contend that in similar cases of tax evasion, bail applications have been rejected by this Court, and the present case involves serious allegations.