Ankit Vijay S/O Shri Tarachand Vijay vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court allowed the bail application. The reasoning was based on several factors: the petitioner had been in custody since 25.03.2021, co-accused individuals had already been granted bail, and the offense was characterized as an economic offense involving defalcation of an amount. The submission of a charge-sheet was also a significant factor. The Court found it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The operative direction was to release the petitioner on bail upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of the learned trial judge, ensuring his appearance on all hearing dates.

Facts

The petitioner, Ankit Vijay, filed a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. challenging an order dated 27.05.2021. The case involves alleged offenses under Section 132(1)(b)(c) read with Section 1(i) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner claims a false case has been made against him and he has no connection to the alleged offense. He has been in custody since 25.03.2021. The respondents, Union of India and Director General GST Intelligence, opposed the bail application. The court noted that co-accused have been released on bail and the matter pertains to an economic offense involving defalcation of an amount, with a charge-sheet already submitted.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, Ankit Vijay, is entitled to be released on bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in connection with alleged offenses under Section 132(1)(b)(c) read with Section 1(i) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017, considering his period of incarceration and the nature of the offense. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that a false case has been foisted upon him, he has no involvement in the alleged offense, and his continued detention would serve no useful purpose. Respondent's Contention: The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application.