Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging ₹50 Lakh Bail Condition in GST Prosecution Case

Case Overview

Case: Sahil Jain Vs Superintendent (Anti Evasion)
Court: Punjab and Haryana High Court
Provisions Invoked: Section 484 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 of BNSS
Subject Matter: Challenge to bail condition requiring furnishing of Bank Guarantee/FDR of ₹50 lakhs

Background and Factual Matrix

The Punjab and Haryana High Court was called upon to adjudicate a petition wherein the assessee-accused sought quashing of a specific bail condition that mandated the furnishing of a bank guarantee or Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR) amounting to ₹50 lakhs. The petition was grounded on two primary contentions — first, that the surety who had earlier furnished the bank guarantee had since withdrawn, and second, that the assessee was financially incapable of arranging a fresh surety of equivalent magnitude.

The Original Bail Order

The assessee, who was facing prosecution in a complaint case involving alleged fake invoicing under GST-related provisions, had applied for bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. The concerned Court, by its order dated 11.01.2021, admitted the assessee to bail subject to a comprehensive set of conditions, which were as follows:

  1. The accused shall furnish a bank guarantee/FDR for an amount of ₹50 lakhs, liable to be forfeited to the State upon violation of any condition imposed vide the said order.
  2. The accused shall be present on each and every date of hearing for appearance before the Court and for purposes of trial.
  3. The accused shall not leave the jurisdiction of this Country without prior permission of the Court, and shall surrender his passport if held; in the absence of a passport, the accused shall file an affidavit undertaking not to obtain a passport without Court permission.
  4. The accused shall not commit any offence of a like nature or any other offence punishable under law.
  5. The accused shall not attempt to influence prosecution witnesses or tamper with evidence.
  6. The accused shall not alter his appearance during the course of the trial.

These conditions were designed to ensure the assessee's continued participation in judicial proceedings and to preserve the integrity of the ongoing prosecution.

Earlier Challenge Before the High Court

Being aggrieved by the condition requiring furnishing of a bank guarantee/FDR of ₹50 lakhs, the assessee had previously challenged the same by filing a petition bearing CRM-M-4374 of 2021 titled Sahil Jain Vs. Joint Commissioner. A Coordinate Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, by order dated 03.03.2021, dismissed that petition after holding that the impugned bail condition was founded on sound judicial principles and that no ground existed to exercise inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.