Kishore Wadhwani vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the condition requiring the applicant to surrender his passport and not leave India without prior permission should be relaxed. The reasoning was primarily based on the fact that no charge sheet had been filed by the GST authorities under the CGST Act, making the condition indefinite. Furthermore, the Court took strong note of the Supreme Court's order in the case of Nitesh Wadhwani (a co-accused facing similar circumstances, including adjudication proceedings and an ECIR under the PML Act), where the Apex Court had permitted travel abroad without the requirement of reporting to the court. The Court found this precedent persuasive and applicable to the present applicant's situation. The ED's intervention and confidential report were considered, but the primary focus remained on the lack of progress in the GST prosecution and the Supreme Court's stance on similar conditions. The Court directed that Condition No. 11(v) imposed on the applicant be relaxed. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Facts

The applicant, Kishore Wadhwani, sought modification of a bail condition imposed on August 13, 2020, which required him to surrender his passport and not leave India without prior court permission. This bail was granted in connection with a case registered under Section 132(1)(a)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and Sections 409, 467, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant argued that the GST authorities had not filed a charge sheet, making the condition indefinite. The respondent (GST Authorities) stated that a separate FIR was registered under IPC sections, and the sanctioning authority had not yet decided on continuing prosecution under the GST Act. Adjudication proceedings were initiated but stayed by another court order. Additionally, an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) was registered against the applicant under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

Key Issues

1. Whether the condition of surrendering the passport and not leaving India without prior court permission, imposed while granting bail under Section 439(1)(B) of the CrPC, can continue indefinitely when no charge sheet has been filed by the GST authorities under Section 132(1)(a)(i) of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The applicant argued that the bail condition requiring passport surrender and prohibiting foreign travel should not persist indefinitely as the GST authorities have not filed a charge sheet. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court's order in a similar case involving co-accused Nitesh Wadhwani. Respondent's Contention: The respondent (GST Authorities) submitted that while no charge sheet was filed under the CGST Act, separate FIRs were registered under IPC sections. They also noted that adjudication proceedings were initiated but stayed. The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) intervened, opposing the relaxation of bail conditions, and submitted a confidential report indicating the applicant's lack of full cooperation. The ED highlighted their powers under the PML Act to impose conditions.