Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 67 (GAU)

Rajesh Kumar Jalan v. State of Assam

2017-01-11

M.R.PATHAK

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T.K. Mishra, learned Addl. PP, Assam. 2. This is an application under section 439, Cr.PC filed by the petitioner, namely, Sri Rajesh Kumar Jalan seeking bail in connection with CID PS Case No. 54/2015 corresponding to GR No. 12651/2015 registered under section 120B/468/471/409, IPC. The petitioner was arrested on 4.12.2016 and since then he is in custody. 3. The contention of the petitioner herein is that he is noway connected with the case as he is neither the licensee of the concerned bonded warehouse involved in the case nor any way connected with the same. The further contention of the petitioner is that excepting once, on all occasions, he appeared before the I/O of the case on receipt of notice under section 41A of the Cr.PC and since 13.12.2016 he is in judicial custody and till date, the I/O has not sought for his custodial detention for his interrogation to investigate the case. The necessary documents have already been seized by the I/O. As such, considering the same and the period of detention, his bail prayer may be considered. 4. The matter relates to evading of payment of excise revenue apart from sales tax more than Rs. 20 crore by one of the bonded warehouses involved in the case. The learned Addl. PP has produced the relevant the case diary and the FSL report. 5. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the entire sale of the concerned bonded warehouse during the period from 2012-15 was based on forged documents and receipt of, the relevant permits and challans were fake; official seals and signatures of all concerned authorities were forged by it and by the said process the said bonded warehouse defalcated huge amount of excise revenue apart from the sales tax of the State. The said bonded warehouse also submitted counterfeit challans before the excise authority to evade such payment of taxes. The said bonded warehouse also submitted counterfeit challans before the excise authority to evade such payment of taxes. Though it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he is not connected with the business of the concerned bonded warehouse for the said period but, the FSL report dated 4.1.2017 clearly reveals that it is the petitioner along with some other accused persons looked after and managed the business of the said bonded warehouse and he was the signatory of various documents for the said bonded warehouse including the issuance of cheques and others. The investigation is not yet complete. Some of the accused persons involved in the case are still on large. 6. Considering the progress of the investigation and the incriminating materials available in the case diary against the petitioner, the court is of the view that this is not a fit case to grant bail to the petitioner considering his period of detention since 4.12.2016. This bail application accordingly stands rejected. Return the case diary.