The Punjab and Haryana High Court granted bail to a person alleged of floating bogus firms to facilitate big firms to save on GST in a fraudulent manner.
The petitioners, Manish and Rajesh are alleged to have floated bogus firms and by entering into bogus transactions with bigger firms, they were getting huge amounts deposited in the bank accounts of the bogus firms so floated and were eventually facilitating the big firms to save on GST in a fraudulent manner and thus, deprived the State Exchequer of the GST which was legitimately due. It was informed that the said accused were moving about in Hyundai ‘i20’ car while carrying laptops and were waiting for someone near the T-point railway line, Grain Market.
The accused has submitted that there is no concrete evidence worth credence to establish their involvement in the alleged scam and that they have falsely been implicated in the instant case. The learned counsel has further submitted that it is in fact a case of double jeopardy wherein the petitioners are also being prosecuted separately in a complaint lodged under provisions of Section 132 of GST wherein they have already been granted bail. The learned counsel has further submitted that although the case of the prosecution is that the accused had caused a loss to State Exchequer to the tune of about ` 80 crores but in fact, the entire loss has already been made good by the industrial units of Panipat who in fact were the beneficiaries and were in fact the real accused. It has further been submitted that the petitioners, in any case, have been behind bars for the last about 21⁄2 years and in these circumstances deserve the concession of bail, particularly when the amount allegedly defrauded has already been recovered back.
The single bench of Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill held that no useful purpose would be served by further detaining the petitioners behind bars who have been in custody for the last about 21⁄2 years. Consequently, the petitions merit acceptance and are hereby accepted, and the petitioners are ordered to be released on regular bail on their furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
“Since the matter is stated to be fixed before the trial Court on 2.11.2021 to consider the framing of charges, the trial Court shall endeavor to hear arguments on the question of framing of charge on the said date and to proceed with the matter expeditiously. The accused are directed to render utmost cooperation with the proceedings of the trial. In case, the trial court finds that the accused are not rendering cooperation or are resorting to dilatory tactics, it shall be open to the trial court to cancel the bail after issuing notice to the accused through their counsel,” the court said.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
