Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel for parties.

Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the appellant is a salaried Director of the company since 2019 and only an employee before that. It is stated that insofar as the payment of ₹ 200 crore as a condition of bail of Vinay Kant Ameta is concerned, that has also been paid through the assets of the Company.

In our view, what is most material is that no notice has been issued to the Company under Section 74 of the GST Act, 2017 which could have resulted in quantification of the amount. Thus on the one hand the charge sheet has been filed but on the other hand no process for quantification of the amount has taken place. The proceedings commenced in October, 2021. The appellant has been charged in the third charge sheet filed. Thus, obviously investigation is over.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, we grant bail to the appellant on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

On the insistence of learned ASG, we clarify that this order cannot be treated as a precedent for anticipatory bail to the Managing Director which will be dealt with on its own terms.

The appeal stands disposed of.