It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that case of the petitioners would not travel beyond Section 132(1)(f) of C.G.S.T. Act, the maximum punishment for which as provided under the Act is only six months. Bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail Application – The petitioners filed application for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for the offence under Section 132(1)(b)(c)(f) of Act, 2017. The maximum punishment for which as provided under the Act is only six months. He remained in custody for a period of three months. The main accused is still absconding. The other petitioner submitted that he is running a petrol pump and the only allegation against him is that his mobile number has been mentioned in registration of the firm He has lodged an FIR against the said firm. The petitioner submitted that he was not instrumental in creation of the fake firms. Even if it is considered that he was also a party to the creation of the fake firms, the act would fall under Section 132(1)(f) of the Act, the maximum sentence for which is six months. They have placed reliance on Sanjay Chandra vs. CBI [2012(1) SCC 40].
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and enlarged the petitioners subject to submitting a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- along with two surety and subject to the certain conditions.
It is contended by counsel for the petitioners that case of the petitioners would not travel beyond Section 132(1)(f) of C.G.S.T. Act, the maximum punishment for which as provided under the Act is only six months. Bail applications are accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused petitioners shall be released on bail provided each of them furnish a personal bond.
Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017— Bail Application – The petitioners filed application for bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C for the offence under Section 132(1)(b)(c)(f) of Act, 2017. The maximum punishment for which as provided under the Act is only six months. He remained in custody for a period of three months. The main accused is still absconding. The other petitioner submitted that he is running a petrol pump and the only allegation against him is that his mobile number has been mentioned in registration of the firm He has lodged an FIR against the said firm. The petitioner submitted that he was not instrumental in creation of the fake firms. Even if it is considered that he was also a party to the creation of the fake firms, the act would fall under Section 132(1)(f) of the Act, the maximum sentence for which is six months. They have placed reliance on Sanjay Chandra vs. CBI [2012(1) SCC 40].
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the petition and enlarged the petitioners subject to submitting a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- along with two surety and subject to the certain conditions.