The Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that Trial Court should decide GST Fraud case on evidence uninfluenced by observations in bail order.
The petitioner, Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence, Chandigarh, has filed the present petition under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to set aside the impugned order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, whereby the regular bail was granted to the respondent/accused.
At the outset, the Counsel for the petitioner contended that while granting the concession of bail to the respondent/accused, the Additional Sessions Judge, has wrongly recorded that the respondent/accused was neither the manager nor owner nor proprietor nor partner of the firms, which were involved in the crime.
The Counsel further contended that certain observations have been made by the Additional Sessions Judge which may prejudice the case of the petitioner before the Trial Court and that it will be satisfactory if order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, is modified to the extent that observations in the impugned order were made only for the limited purpose of grant of bail to the respondent.
The Counsel who appeared on behalf of respondent fairly submitted that he has no objection to the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner.
A Single Bench of Justice observed that “It is not in dispute that vide the impugned order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, regular bail was granted to respondent by taking into consideration the arguments made by the counsel for both the parties. It is well settled that the observations in an order granting bail are always made only for the limited purpose of disposal of a bail application filed by an accused.”
The Court further noted that the impugned order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, is ordered to be modified to the extent that the observations in the said order were made only for the purposes of disposal of the bail application and the trial Court shall decide the main case on the basis of the evidence led by both the parties, uninfluenced by the observations made in the impugned order.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
