Prashant Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another
Case brief
What is this about?
In an appeal against a summons under Section 70 CGST Act 2017, the court examined the threat of arrest for issuance of anticipatory bail, finding procedural delays minor and offences bailable, leading to rejection of bail application.
What did the court decide?
Application rejected; anticipatory bail not granted.
What the court decided
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 5447 of 2021
Applicant :- Prashant Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vipul Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Chandra Shukla
Hon'ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application has been given by the applicant Prashant Gupta against the summon/notice dated 19.1.2021 under Section 70 of Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that at the initial stage an order was passed by this Court on 18.3.2021 by which arrest was stayed till the next date. Further submission is that this order was further extended by the order dated 6.5.2021. A perusal of the order sheet shows that the said interim order was not extended on 22.6.2021 and 6.7.2021.
On being asked what is the threat of arrest in this case, learned counsel for the applicant has mentioned the summon annexed at page 53 of this anticipatory bail application in which following direction has been issued :
" Inquiry as aforesaid is deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Section 193 and Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860) and non compliance of this summon is an offence punishable under Section 174 & 175 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860".
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant established a clear threat of arrest justifying grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
Whether non-extension of interim stay order on summons constitutes a valid ground for anticipatory bail.
Whether offences under Sections 193, 228, 174, and 175 IPC attract threat of arrest for anticipated bail purposes.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Prashant Gupta
- respondent
State of U.P.
Coram
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · August
- Registered
- Case no.
- ABAIL/5447/2021
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court