Page 71 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

2020 ] ABHISHEK MODGIL v. STATE OF U.T., CHANDIGARH 437
(d) They shall surrender their passport, if any (if not already surren-
dered), and in case, they are not a holder of the same, they shall
swear to an affidavit. If they have already surrendered before the
Ld. Special Judge, CBI, that fact should also be supported by an af-
fidavit.
(e) We reserve liberty to the CBI to make an appropriate application for
modification/recalling the order passed by us, if for any reason, the
appellants violate any of the conditions imposed by this Court.”
_______

2020 (38) G.S.T.L. 437 (P & H)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Arun Monga, J.
ABHISHEK MODGIL
Versus
STATE OF U.T., CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 14113 of 2020 (O&M), decided on 12-6-2020
Bail - Anticipatory bail - Tax evasion - Forging and fabricating docu-
ments to avoid tax liability alleged - All documents already in possession of
police - Whether petitioner played any role in entire gamut or merely made
scapegoat, can be ascertained once petitioner joins investigation vis-a-vis doc-
umentary evidence already seized - Petitioner ordered to be released on antici-
patory bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds of local and sound sure-
ty - Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. [paras 5, 6]
Petition allowed
REPRESENTED BY : Shri H.S. Brar, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Shri Manish Jain, APP, for the Respondent.
[Order (Oral)]. - The petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.
390, dated 16-12-2019, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of
Indian Penal Code, Police Station Central, Sector 17, Chandigarh.
2. As per allegations in the FIR, petitioner is proprietor of M/s. Ma-
hadev Metals. The petitioner obtained GST registration and had taxable sup-
plies/transactions of goods to the tune of Rs. 20,46,52,098/-. He is stated to have
committed tax evasion to the tune of Rs. 4,02,00,136/- by generating bogus in-
voices of sales and purchases.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a young
boy of 24 years, just a matriculate and is not even educated enough to under-
stand or carry out transactions of such high magnitude running into more than
Rs. 20 crores. He has been simply made a scapegoat. According to him, the iden-
tity documents of the petitioner were misused and a dummy firm was created,
wherein alleged bogus entries were made to evade the government taxes. He
further submits that the petitioner has nothing to do with these transactions and
he is ready to join the investigation. According to him, the case is based on doc-
umentary evidence, which are in police possession and custodial interrogation of
the petitioner is not required.
GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  71