Suleman vs. The State Of Madhya Pradesh

Held

The Court allowed the bail application, directing the applicant's release on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 75,000/- with one solvent surety. The Court found that the applicant's case was similar to that of co-accused Amir Halani, who had been enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The Court noted that the facts and evidence available on record regarding the present applicant and Amir Halani were identical. Therefore, on the ground of parity, it was deemed proper to release the applicant on bail. The Court explicitly stated that it was not commenting on the merits of the case. The applicant is required to appear before the trial court as and when required and abide by the conditions under Section 437(3) of the CrPC.

Facts

The applicant, Suleman, filed a bail application under Section 439 of the CrPC, having been in jail since June 6, 2022, in connection with a case registered under various sections of the IPC and the IT Act. The prosecution's case originated from a letter by the Additional Commissioner GST and Central Excise to Cyber Crime Indore, alleging the upload of fake/fraudulent documents on the GST portal to obtain online registration and defraud the government exchequer. Investigations revealed that GST registrations were obtained using fraudulent means, including the use of account details of random persons and forged documents to usurp identities for generating and passing fake input tax credit. The applicant was allegedly involved with co-accused in preparing forged firms in the names of unknown persons.

Key Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail on the ground of parity with co-accused Amir Halani, who was enlarged on bail by the Hon'ble Apex Court, considering that the facts and evidence against the applicant and Amir Halani are identical? Petitioner's Contention: The applicant is innocent and falsely implicated. There is no legal evidence connecting him to the offense. He has been in custody since May 27, 2022. His earlier bail application was dismissed as withdrawn. However, a co-accused, Amir Halani, was granted bail by the Apex Court, and another co-accused, Arshan Marchant, was granted bail by the trial court on the same grounds. Therefore, on the principle of parity, the applicant should be released on bail. Respondent's Contention: The learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State opposed the bail application and prayed for its rejection.