Gauhati High Court
Techi Alban vs The State Of Assam on 10 March, 2025
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010040232025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : AB/456/2025
TECHI ALBAN
S/O- TECHI RAK, PROP. OF M/S TECHI ALBAN,
R/O- 042, NEAR POLICE STATION, DOKUM COLONY,
NAHARLAGUN,
DIST- PAPUMPARE, ARUNACHAL PRADESH-791110
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REP BY PP ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS A GOGOI, MR G PHUKAN
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
ORDER
10.03.2025
1. Heard Mr. G. Phukan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard
Mr. D. Das, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State of
Assam.
Page No.# 2/3
2. This application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita(BNSS), 2023, has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Techi Alban, who
is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jonai P.S. Case No. 162/2021
under Section 120(B)/420/468/471/406 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The accusation against the present petitioner is that on 20.08.2021,
one Tushar Ngatey lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Jonai Police
Station, inter alia, alleging that the petitioner had prudently and falsely sold
taxable value of Rs. 6,35,43,524/-(Rupees Six Crore, Thirty-five Lakhs, Forty-
three Thousand, Five Hundred and Twenty-four only) by showing fake input
value of Rs. 1,71,52,155.00/-(Rupees One Crore Seventy-one Lakhs Fifty-two
Thousand and One Hundred and Fifty-five only) in the name of the informant
from his GST account.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the
present case has been registered under various provisions of BNSS, however,
the offence alleged is an offence under Section 132 of the Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017(in short GST Act, 2017). He submits that as per Section 132(1)
(iii)of the said Act, the alleged offence is punishable with an imprisonment for 1
year and with a fine, which may extend to Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs)
and therefore, the offence is a bailable offence.
5. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
submitted that the perusal of the Case Diary would be necessary, since the
offence alleged is an economic offence involving huge quantity of money.
6. This Court is of the considered opining that the perusal of the Case
Diary would be necessary for consideration of the instant bail application.
7. Hence, call for the Case Diary, fixing 28.03.2025.
8. Since the petitioner has not been named as an accused in the FIR,
Page No.# 3/3
the petitioner, namely, Techi Alban is directed to appear before the Investigating
Officer of Jonai P.S. Case No. 162/2021 within a period of 7(seven) days from
the date of this order and shall co-operate in the investigation. If she does so
within the stipulated period of time, in the event of her arrest, in connection
with Jonai P.S. Case No. 162/2021, the above named-petitioner shall be allowed
to go on interim bail of Rs. 30,000/- with a suitable surety of like amount to the
satisfaction of the arresting authority, subject to the conditions that:-
i. That the petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation and shall appear
before the Investigating Officer; and
ii. That the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any other persons who may be acquainted with the
facts of the case so as to dissuade such persons from disclosing such facts
before the Investigating Officer.
9. List accordingly on 28.03.2025, for Case Diary.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant