Vinod Das vs. State
Held
The Court allowed the bail application. While acknowledging the petitioner's contention regarding GST evasion as a potential motive for the FIR, the Court deemed it premature to appreciate this at the bail stage. However, the Court noted that the allegations in the FIR were based solely on oral assertions and that the petitioner was in custody for magistrate-triable offences. Considering the time likely to be consumed in investigation and trial, and the overall facts and circumstances, the Court found it appropriate to grant bail. The petitioner was directed to be released on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two surety bonds of Rs. 25,000/- each, with a stipulation to appear before the trial court on all hearing dates and as and when called upon.
Facts
The petitioner, Vinod Das, is in custody in relation to FIR No. 151/2021, Police Station Basni, Jodhpur West, for offences under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The complainant alleged that the petitioner, employed in his thermocol factory commissioned in 2019, sold manufactured goods worth Rs. 1.5 Crores to associates without bills, thereby misappropriating the goods. The petitioner's counsel contended that the FIR was filed to preempt action against the complainant for GST evasion. The allegations in the FIR are based on oral assertions, and the petitioner is in custody for magistrate-triable offences.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. given the nature of the allegations and the fact that the offences are magistrate-triable? Petitioner's Contentions: The petitioner argued that the FIR was filed with the ulterior motive of preempting action against the complainant for GST evasion. The allegations are purely oral, and the petitioner is in judicial custody for offences that are triable by a Magistrate. The investigation and trial are likely to consume considerable time. Respondent's Contentions: The respondent (State) did not explicitly record arguments regarding the bail application itself, but the complainant's counsel was present. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondent's side against the bail application.
Sections Cited
Section 439 Cr.P.C., Section 420 IPC, Section 406 IPC
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Order 23/10/2021 The instant bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner who is in custody in relation to FIR No.151/2021, Police Station Basni, Jodhpur West for offences under Sections 420 & 406 IPC.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for the complainant and perused the material available on record.
The complainant has filed the FIR against the petitioner for the above offences which are magistrate triable. The allegation which has been set out in the FIR is that the petitioner was employed in the thermocol factory of
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 Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.