Hon’ble Orissa High Court released the petitioner on interim bail for a period of four weeks from the date of release (now extended till April 2022 by subsequent orders) in case where the arrest was made even before submission of the prosecution report in a complaint case.
Read more about the case [Sandeep Mohanty versus State of Odisha BLAPL No. 1064 of 2021] below:
Facts of the Case
1. Compliant petition was filed by the Deputy Commissioner.
2. The petitioner was arrested on 31.12.2020 and produced in the Magistrate Court on 31.12.2020 along with the compliant petition.
3. The cognizance of the offence was taken.
4. Deputy Commissioner continued to investigate the matter and ultimately submitted the prosecution report to Commissioner, GST for perusal and to accord sanction as per section 134 of the Odisha GST Act, 2017.
5. The prosecution report was filed after obtaining sanction before the learned Magistrate.
Observations of the Court
6. The Hon’ble Orissa High Court has followed the principles of law laid down in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami (supra) which has been held as follows:
“54. In complaint cases, at the first instance, the Court should direct serving of the summons along with the copy of the complaint. If the accused seems to be avoiding the summons, the Court, in the second instance should issue bailable-warrant. In the third instance, when the Court is fully satisfied that the accused is avoiding the Court proceeding intentionally, the process of issuance of the non-bailable warrant should be resorted to. Personal liberty is paramount; therefore, we caution Courts at the first and second instance to refrain from issuing nonbailable warrants.”
Decision by the Court
7. The Hon’ble Odisha High Court released the petitioner on interim bail for the period of four weeks from the date of release with conditions.
Our Remarks
8. In the present case, it appears that the arrest was made as per orders passed by the Magistrate wherein the accused was merely produced by the Deputy Commissioner with a complaint petition i.e., in the absence of approval from Commissioner u/s 69 of the Act.
9. Therefore, in such kind of cases i.e., complaint cases, the Magistrate has to direct for investigation in the offence in order to decide existence of sufficient ground for proceeding.
10. Section 134 of GST Act clearly provides that the Magistrate shall take cognizance of offence with the previous sanction of the Commissioner.
11. The submission of prosecution report duly approved by the Commissioner GST provides the jurisdiction to Magistrate to take cognizance of the offence.