Heard Sri Durgesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State as well as Sri Dileep Chandra Mathur, learned counsel for O.P. No.1-Union of India and perused the record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case DGGI/ARU/Gr.B/ST No. 29 of 2020 under Section 132 (1) (b) C.G.S.T. Act, Police Station- Sikandara, District- Agra, during pendency of trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that it is a case of opposite party no. 1 that M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi has taken fraudulent inward ITC from M/s. A.D. Print Pack, House No. 3401, Gali No. 75, Block E-II, Molar Band Extn., Badarpur, South Delhi with GSTN 07ABMFA0199D1Z1 and M/s. Radhey Krishna Enterprises, Delhi (GSTN 07BIMP5513P1ZQ), 3451, Gali No. 77, Molarband Ext., Badarpur, Delhi-44. The ITC involvement in respect of latter party is ₹ 4.45 Crores and in respect of former, the ITC involvement is ₹ 0.31 Crores. Thus, total fraudulent inward ITC taken by M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, from the above said two firms, is ₹ 4.76 Crores which was utilized illegally; Archit Agrawal is the proprietor of firm M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi, he was also summoned under Section 70 of CGST Act, 2017 for recording his statement, but neither he was arrested nor he has been made accused in the present case.
It is next submitted that applicant was summoned under Section 70 of CGST Act, for recording his statement and after recording his statement he was illegally arrested, shifting the responsibility of Archit Agrawal on the shoulder of the applicant. It is submitted that so far as the present applicant Sanchit Gupta is concerned, only allegation against him is that he was involved in the aforesaid fraudulent activity of M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi by helping Archit Agrawal, who is proprietor of M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi; The opposite party no. 1 in order to make the alleged offence nonbailable, enhanced the amount of alleged fraudulent inward ITC from ₹ 4.76 Crores to ₹ 5.19 Crores; under the facts of the present case the applicant cannot be said to be beneficiary of alleged fraudulent inward ITC, which was availed by M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi, for which only Archit Agrawal can be said to be main beneficiary, who has not been made accused in the present case; Additional Director General, DGGI, LZU, Lucknow has wrongly and illegally granted authorization/sanction order dated 15.03.2021 in exercise of power under Section 132(6) of the CGST Act, 2017 without applying his mind; till date no proceeding under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 has been initiated by the Department nor any order under Section 83 of the CGST Act, 2017 has been passed for attachment of bank account of M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi.
The applicant is employee of M/s. Shree Shyam Ji Traders, Delhi. Lastly, it is contended that the offence is triable by Magistrate and maximum sentence of imprisonment is three years. The applicant is in jail since 16th January, 2021 (more than 7 months) having no criminal history to his credit as stated in paragraph no. 17 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application.
Learned A.G.A. as well as Sri Dileep Chandra Mathur,learned counsel for the opposite party no.1 has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail. The application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Sanchit Gupta who is involved in aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.