Ashutosh Kumar Rana Alias Ashutosh Kumar Alias Rana vs. The State Of Jharkhand

Facts

The petitioner, Ashutosh Kumar Rana, is an accused in TELCO P.S. Case No. 104 of 2018. The case involves allegations of illegal Input Tax Credit (ITC) benefits being provided by Pankaj Singh, proprietor of P.K. Traders, leading to alleged fraud on the government exchequer. Investigations revealed discrepancies in the documentation submitted for GST registration, including a false rent agreement. Pankaj Singh stated he worked under a contractor and obtained GST registration with the help of Satya Prakash Singh, who allegedly took all documents, leaving Pankaj Singh without any actual business. Both Pankaj Singh and Satya Prakash Singh recorded statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in a related case (G.R. Case No. 1860 of 2018), naming other accused persons, but the petitioner's name was not mentioned in these statements. The petitioner has been in custody since March 19, 2020. The petitioner was previously granted bail by this Court in a different case (Bistupur P.S. Case No. 183 of 2018) on similar grounds.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail. The reasoning primarily hinges on the fact that the petitioner's name was not mentioned in the Section 164 Cr.P.C. statements recorded from Pankaj Singh and Satya Prakash Singh, who were involved in the alleged illegal provision of ITC and defrauding the government exchequer. These statements, which implicated other accused persons, did not include the petitioner. The Court also took into consideration that the petitioner had previously been granted bail by the same High Court in a connected case (B.A. No. 395 of 2020) concerning Bistupur P.S. Case No. 183 of 2018, based on similar considerations. The petitioner's period of custody since March 19, 2020, was also a factor. The Court directed the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner's continued detention is justified given that his name does not appear in the Section 164 Cr.P.C. statements of co-accused Pankaj Singh and Satya Prakash Singh, who implicated other individuals in the alleged GST fraud. Contentions: Petitioner: Argued that the absence of his name in the Section 164 Cr.P.C. statements of key witnesses, despite their statements implicating others, warrants his release on bail. Relied on the fact that he was granted bail in a related case (Bistupur P.S. Case No. 183 of 2018) by the same court on similar grounds. Highlighted his period of custody since March 19, 2020. Revenue/State: No specific arguments recorded for the State in the provided judgment.