[2025:RJ-JP:47167] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 8753/2025 Kamal Kishor Agarwal S/o Meghraj Agarwal, Aged About 58 Years, M/s Styllent Manufacturing Private Limited, Gstin 08Abkcs6038G1Z2 And M/s Krishna Industries, (Legal Name Krishna Mani Shukla), Gstin 08Awaps2768Rzm, Permanent Resident Of In Front Of Gehlot Gas Agency, Naya Drwaja Road, Nagaur, Currently Residing At R K Sa 84, Kota (Raj.) (Presently Accused Petitioner Is Confined At Central Jail, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Bharat Singh, Deputy Commissioner, State Tax, Circle-B, Enforcement Wing-Ii, Rajasthan, Jaipur. 2. Union Of India, Through Commissioner Central Gst Department Statue Circle, Jaipur. ----Respondents ______________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Jh iq"isUnq 'kekZ Jh fo'kky ikjhd For Respondent(s) : Jh Hkjr O;kl] ofj"B vf/koDrk ,-,l-th- tfj, oh-lh- e; Jh lh-,l-flUgk Jh xkSjo dqekj] phQ dfe'uj] th-,l-Vh fe- ekgh ;kno] ,-,-th- e; fe- gf"kZrk oekZ Jh dqekj iky xkSre] vkbZ-,-,l- phQ dfe'uj] jkT; th-,l-Vh- Jh Hkjr flag] fMIVh dfe'uj] ,l-th-,l-Vh- Jh ekuosUnz flag 'ks[kkor] yksd vfHk;kstd Jh vfer dqekj xqIrk] yksd vfHk;kstd _______________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 21-11-2025 izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dh vksj ls v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr vk{ksfir vkns'k fnukad& 02-07-2025 ds fo:) ;g tekur vkosnu i= vUrxZr /kkjk [2025:RJ-JP:47167] (2 of 5) [CRLMB-8753/2025] 483 ch-,u-,l-,l- mls vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 132¼1½ jktLFkku oLrq ,oa lsokdj vf/kfu;e 2017 esa ntZ izdj.k la[;k&DC-EW-ll/2025-26/53 GST JAIPUR esa fu;fer tekur iznku fd;s tkus ds laca/k esa izLrqr fd;k x;k gSA cgl lquh xbZ A ;ksX; vf/koDrk izkFkhZ dk rdZ gS fd izkFkhZ dks ekeys esa >waBk Qalk;k x;k gS] vuqla/kku iw.kZ gksdj vkjksi i= izLrqr fd;k tk pqdk gS] izkFkhZ fnukad 15-05-2025 ls vfHkj{kk esa gSA mudk ;g Hkh fuosnu gS fd foHkkx us LVkbysaV eSU;wQSDpfjax izkbZosV fyfeVsM o eSllZ d`".kk baMLVªht ds fo:) dze'k% 882-89 djksM+ ,oa 660-89 djksM+ :i, dh dj pksjh ds laca/k esa ifjokn izLrqr fd;k gS A mudk fuosnu gS fd mDr daiuh o b.MLVªh esa u rks izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr Mk;jsDVj gS] u gh og ekfyd gS o uk gh og ykHkkFkhZ gS ] izkFkhZ dk buls fdlh izdkj dk dksbZ laca/k ugh jgk gS] izkFkhZ ds fo:) dksbZ Hkh nLrkosth lk{; izLrqr ugha dh xbZ gS] ek= lquh lquk;h lk{; ds vk/kkj ij ;g ifjokn izLrqr fd;k x;k gS A ekeyk izFke Js.kh eftLVªsV U;k;ky; }kjk fopkj.k ;ksX; gS rFkk vf/kdre 5 o"kZ dh ltk dk izko/kku gSA bl laca/k esa ;ksX; vf/koDrk izkFkhZ dh vksj ls U;kf;d n`"Vkar Ratnambar Kaushik v. Union of India [(2023) 2 SCC 621] izLrqr dj mlds iSjk la[;k&6 dh vksj /;ku vkd`"V fd;k x;k gSA mudk ;g Hkh fuosnu gS fd vUoh{kk esa le; yxsxk] vr% izkFkhZ dks tekur ij NksM+k tkosA mUgksaus vius rdksZa ds leFkZu esa fuEufyf[kr U;kf;d n`"Vkar izLrqr fd, gSa%& 1. Lakshya Agarwal Vs. DGGI Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur & another, CRLMB No.20392//2021 dt.08.03.2022. 2. Rishabh Jain v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. (S.B. Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.10718/2023) decided on 04.12.2023. 3. Vineet Jain v. Union of India (S.L.P. No.4349/2025) decided on 28.04.2025 4. Vikas Sain Vs. State of Rajasthan, CRLMB No.6773/2025 dt.26.06.2025. [2025:RJ-JP:47167] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-8753/2025] 5. Vikas Jain Vs. State of Rajasthan, CRLMB No.7080/2025 dt.31.10.2025 6. Rajiv Jindal Vs. The STate of U.P., SLP (Criminal) No.13548-13550/2024 dt. 25.10.2024. 7. Dananjay Singh Vs,. Union of India,CRLMB No.18825/2021 dt.05.02.2022. 8. Mohit Vijay Vs. Union of India, CRLMB No.7605/2019 dt.02.06.2020 and 9. Amit Singhal Vs. Bail Application No.10718/2023) decided on 04.12.2023. 3. Vineet Jain v. Union of India (S.L.P. No.4349/2025) decided on 28.04.2025 4. Vikas Sain Vs. State of Rajasthan, CRLMB No.6773/2025 dt.26.06.2025. [2025:RJ-JP:47167] (3 of 5) [CRLMB-8753/2025] 5. Vikas Jain Vs. State of Rajasthan, CRLMB No.7080/2025 dt.31.10.2025 6. Rajiv Jindal Vs. The STate of U.P., SLP (Criminal) No.13548-13550/2024 dt. 25.10.2024. 7. Dananjay Singh Vs,. Union of India,CRLMB No.18825/2021 dt.05.02.2022. 8. Mohit Vijay Vs. Union of India, CRLMB No.7605/2019 dt.02.06.2020 and 9. Amit Singhal Vs. State of Rajasthan, CRLMB No.4413/2025 dt.25.04.2025 blds foijhr fo}ku yksd vfHk;kstd us tekur izkFkZuk i= dk fojks/k fd;k A mudk fuosnu gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr LVkbysaV eSU;wQSDpfjax izkbZosV fyfeVsM o eSllZ d`".kk baMLVªht esa Mk;jsDVj ugha gSa uk gh og ekfyd gS ijUrq og ekLVjekbZ.M o drkZ/krkZ gS A vuqla/kku ds nkSjku muds }kjk lk{khx.k ds c;ku fy, x, gSa mlesa Hkh ;g lk{; izdV gq;h gSA mudk ;g Hkh fuosnu gS fd izkFkhZ ds fo:) ,d izdj.k igys ls yafcr gS] bl izdj.k esa 1543 djksM :i, dj pksjh dk ekeyk gS] vijk/k dh izd`fr xaHkhj gS] vr% tekur vkosnu fujLr fd;k tkosA geus nksuksa i{kksa }kjk izLrqr rdksZ o fordksZa ij euu fd;kA cgl ds nkSjku ;g Lohd`r fLFkfr jgh gS fd izkFkhZ vfHk;qDr LVkbysaV eSU;wQSDpfjax izkbZosV fyfeVsM o eSllZ d`".kk baMLVªht esa u rks Mk;jsDVj gS o u gh ekfyd gS ] ,slh fLFkfr esa izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr ds ;ksX; vf/koDrk }kjk tks rdZ j[ks x, gSa mUgsa utjvankt ugha fd;k tk ldrk ,oa os rdZ fopkj ;ksX; gSaA vkjksi i= ds lkFk tks lk{; nLrkost izLrqr fd, x, gSa muls izdV gS fd izkFkhZ ds fo:) dksbZ Hkh nLrkosth lk{; izdV ugha gq;h gS A izkFkhZ dks lk{khx.k ds ekSf[kd c;kuksa ds vk/kkj ij fyIr fd;k x;k gS A ;g Hkh izdV gS fd izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr 6 ekg ls vf/kd le; ls vfHkj{kk esa gSA izdj.k izFke Js.kh eftLVªsV U;k;ky; }kjk fopkj.k ;ksX; gS ftlesa vf/kdre 5 o"kZ dh ltk dk izko/kku gS A bl laca/k esa izkFkhZ dh vksj ls [2025:RJ-JP:47167] (4 of 5) [CRLMB-8753/2025] izLrqr U;kf;d n`"Vkar&Ratnambar Kaushik v. Union of India [(2023) 2 SCC 621] dk iSjk la[;k&6 lqlaxr gS tks fuEu izdkj gS %& "In considering the application for bail, it is noted that the petitioner was arrested on 21.07.2022 and while in custody, the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed. Even if it is taken note that the alleged evasion of tax by the petitioner is to the extent as provided under Section 132(1)(l)(i), the punishment provided is, imprisonment which may extend to 5 years and fine. The petitioner has already undergone incarceration for more than four months and completion of trial, in any event, would take some time. Needless to mention that the petitioner if released on bail, is required to adhere to the conditions to be imposed and diligently participate in the trial. Further, in a case of the present nature, the evidence to be tendered by the respondent would essentially be documentary and electronic. The ocular evidence will be through official witnesses, due to which there can be no apprehension of tampering, intimidating or influencing. Therefore, keeping all these aspects in perspective, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, we find it proper to grant the prayer made by the petitioner." vr% izdj.k dh rF;kRed fLFkfr] vuqla/kku ds nkSjku izkFkhZ vfHk;qDr ds fo:) ladfyr dh xbZ lk{; dh izd`fr] izkFkhZ dh vfHkj{kk vof/k] ekeys dk eftLVªsV U;k;ky; }kjk fopkj.k ;ksX; gksdj vf/kdre 5 o"kZ dh ltk dk izko/kku gksus] vUoh{kk esa yxus okys le; o vU; ifjfLFkfr;ksa ij fopkj djus ds ckn] izdj.k ds xq.kkoxq.k ij dksbZ vafre jk; O;Dr fd, fcuk izkFkhZ dks tekur dh lqfo/kk fn;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr izrhr gksrk gSA ifj.kker% ;g tekur vkosnu i= Lohdkj fd;k tkrk gS rFkk vkns'k fn;k tkrk gS fd ;fn izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds larks"kizn 2]00]000@&:i, ¼v{kjs :i;s nks yk[k ek=½ dk O;fDrxr ca/ki= o 1]00]000&1]00]000@& :i;s dh nks lqn`<+ ,oa fo'oluh; izfrHkwfr;ka bl vk'k; dh izLrqr dj ns fd og izdj.k ds fopkj.k ds nkSjku fopkj.k [2025:RJ-JP:47167] (5 of 5) [CRLMB-8753/2025] U;k;ky; ds le{k izR;sd rkjh[k is'kh ij mifLFkr gksrk jgsxk rFkk U;k;ky; dh vuqefr ds fcuk Hkkjr ns'k ugha NksM+sxk] rks izkFkhZ@vfHk;qDr dey fd'kksj vxzoky iq= es?kjkt vxzoky dks ¼;fn og vU; fdlh izdj.k esa oakfNr u gksa rks½ vfoyEc tekur ij fjgk dj fn;k tkosA (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J Rishikesh Soni/07