Final Order 2

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: cIN THE COURT OF SH. DHEERAJ MOR : Ld. ASJ-06 : NEW
DELHI DISTRICT : PATIALA HOUSE COURTS : NEW
DELHI
Bail Matters 1531/2024
Rahul Gupta Vs. DGGI
File No. DGGI/INV/GST/2597/2024/Gr.A
U/s. 132(1)(b) CGST Act, 1017
18.10.2024
This is an application under Section 483 BNSS for
seeking regular bail of the applicant Rahul Gupta.
Present: Sh. Sunil Dalal, Ld. Senior Advocate along with Sh.
Aditya Kumar, Sh. Mahabir Singh, Sh. Navish Bhati
and Sh.Gaurav Gaur, Ld. Counsels for the applicant.
Sh. Harpreet Singh, Ld. Senior Standing Counsel for
the Department.
IO along with the case file.
1. Reply to the bail application is filed. Its copy is
supplied to the other side.
2. Arguments on this application are heard. Case file,
application and its reply are carefully perused.
3. In nutshell, the case of the prosecution is that the
applicant was found running a fake GST racket wherein he
provided bogus invoices to his clients through his 32 sham firms
without actual supply of any goods/services for aiding his said
clients to evade GST and thereby earned commission amount
ranging from 1.5% to 6% of the invoice value. He used his said
sham firms to pass on fraudulent input tax credit by issuing
bogus invoices without accompanying supply of goods to his
Page No.1/5
-- 1 of 5 --
clients/recipient firms. His premises were searched on
12.09.2024 and certain incriminating documents and electronic
devices were recovered. From analysis of the said records, it was
found that his sham firms have passed-on total input tax credit to
the tune of Rs.51.33 crores. He was arrested on 13.09.2024.
4. Ld. Senior Advocate for the applicant has argued
that he is in custody for the last 35 days and he is no more
required for the investigation of this case. He does not have any
other previous involvement. The investigating agency is not
likely to conclude its investigation within the statutory period of
60 days. He satisfies the triple test for grant of bail. He is not a
flight risk as he has deep roots in society. The entire evidence is
documentary in nature and it is within the possession of the
investigating agency. Therefore, there is no likelihood of it being
tampered. All the prosecution witnesses are government officials
and so, there is no possibility of him influencing them, if released
on bail. Furthermore, the maximum punishment prescribed for
the offence under which he has been arrested is five years.
Therefore, the law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in “Arnesh
Kumar vs. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273” and “Satender
Kumar Antil vs. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51” should be beneficially
applied to the applicant. With these submissions, he has sought
his release on bail.
5. On the other hand, ld. Standing Counsel for the
department has opposed the present application on the ground
that the allegations against him are serious in nature as he is a
mastermind of the entire syndicate for creating 32 fake firms to
pass on fraudulent ITC to various beneficiaries without actual
Page No.2/5
-- 2 of 5 --
supply of goods or services. He has caused huge loss to the
government exchequer that runs into crores of rupees by helping
the co-accused persons in evading GST. He has argued that the
investigation qua the applicant is still pending. The various
documents including electronic devices recovered from his office
are being analyzed for ascertaining the expense and extent of his
complicity in the present offence. All the beneficiaries of
passing-on of input tax credit by the applicant are yet to be
examined. He submits that the investigation qua the applicant
would be concluded within 60 days of his arrest. If he is released
on bail, he may tamper with the evidence and derail the
investigation. With these submissions, he has sought dismissal of
this application.
6. Admittedly, nothing more is required to be
recovered from the accused. The evidence in this case is in the
form of documents including electronic devices which have
already been seized by the investigating agency. The applicant is
no more required for the investigation of this case. Therefore, his
further incarceration will serve no fruitful purpose. The
possibility of tampering of evidence by the applicant and
influencing the prosecution witnesses, if released on bail, are
minimal as the entire evidence is within the control/possession of
the investigating agency and all the prosecution witnesses are
government officials.
7. He has clean antecedents and he is stated to have
deep roots in society. Therefore, his flight risk is negligible.
Besides, stringent conditions can be imposed upon him to ensure
that he does not impede or influence the investigation and his
Page No.3/5
-- 3 of 5 --
presence is secured during the trial of this case. The maximum
punishment for the offence under which he has been arrested
(u/s. 132 CGST Act) is five years and therefore, the principles
laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar (supra) and
Satender Kumar Antil (supra) are mandatorily and benevolently
required to be followed in this case. Further, this court is
conscious of the settled principle of bail that “Bail is rule and jail
is an exception”. The said sacrosanct principle is one of the
crucial guiding factor for disposing off bail applications.
8. In the above facts and circumstances, the applicant
Rahul Gupta is admitted to bail on furnishing of personal bond in
the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac Only) with one surety
in the like amount subject to satisfaction of the concerned Ld.
JMFC/ Link JMFC/ Duty JMFC and subject to following
conditions:-
(i) He shall join the investigation as and when required
by the IO and he shall regularly appear before the
Court during trial of the case;
(ii) He shall not tamper with the evidence;
(iii) He shall not contact the prosecution witnesses and
shall not pressurize them, induce them or extend any
kind of threat to them;
(iv) He shall convey his address to the Ld. Trial Court
and the department concerned in case of its change;
(v) He shall not leave the country without prior
permission of the Ld. Trial Court; and
(vi) He shall provide his mobile number to the
Investigating Officer and keep it operational at all
times.
9. It is clarified that nothing expressed herein shall
tantamount to an expression of opinion on merits of the case. The
application is accordingly disposed off.
Page No.4/5
-- 4 of 5 --
10. As prayed, copy of this order be given
dasti to the
parties.
11. Its another copy be sent to the concerned Jail
Superintendent for intimation to the applicant.
(Dheeraj Mor)
Bail Roster Judge
ASJ-06/NDD/PHC
New Delhi:18.10.2024
Page No.5/5
-- 5 of 5 --