Tarun Jain vs. Directorate General of GST Intelligence DGGI - (High Court of Delhi) (26 Nov 2021)

Anticipatory bail is a statutory right in consonance with the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution

MANU/DE/3243/2021

Criminal

The Petitioner has approached present Court by way of the instant application under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) seeking anticipatory bail in a matter pertaining to Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 ("CGST Act"). Another Application has also been filed before present Court under Section 438 read with Section 482 of the CrPC seeking ad-interim protection from coercive action that might be taken by the Respondent during the pendency of the Anticipatory Bail Application.

There is no embargo under the CGST Act restraining the Petitioner from seeking pre-arrest bail. Economic offences such as tax evasion, money laundering, etc. affect the economy of the country and thus, are considered grave in nature. To deter persons from indulging in such economic offences, criminal sanctions are required to be imposed. One of the most prominent criminal sanctions imposed with regard to economic offences is that of arrest. It is widely acknowledged that, arrests result in deprivation of liberty of a person.

In the present case, there cannot be any conflict with the fact that, Petitioner has been charged with economic offence. However, it is to be reiterated that, the offence does not contemplate punishment for more than five years or commission of any serious offence along with the economic offence as it is usually the case in offences under other special statutes dealing with economic offences like Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2003. Thus, as per the scheme of the CGST Act, though the offence is of economic nature yet the punishment prescribed cannot be ignored to determine the heinousness of the offence.

Since, anticipatory bail is a statutory right in consonance with the Right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950, it is essential to be alive to the various facets that form a part of rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

These are competing interests included in an anticipatory bail application i.e., the liberty of the accused and the interest of the investigative authorities for discovering the particular of offence. It is the case of the Petitioner that he failed to appear due to his ill health, which evidently no more exists. The other ground pertains to apprehension of arrest, which can be removed by allowing the present application. Custodial interrogation in the instant matter is neither warranted nor provided for by the statute. Detaining the Petitioner in Judicial Custody would serve no purpose rather would adversely impact the business of the petitioner.

This court must give effect to Article 21 of the Constitution in letter as well as in spirit while deciding the anticipatory bail application. In view of the facts and circumstances and in light of the provisions of law, present Court is inclined to allow the anticipatory bail application with some stringent conditions in view of the prior conduct of the Petitioner.

Tags : BAIL GRANT CONDUCT