Bail in alleged GST fraud declined for absconding, non-cooperation, and mastermind allegations involving fake firms and wrongful input tax credit.

Bail in an alleged GST fraud prosecution was declined because the petitioner had not appeared despite departmental notices, remained absconding for about a year after the complaint, and was accused of being the mastermind behind creation of 38 fake firms and wrongful availment of input tax credit. The Court treated this conduct, together with the gravity of the alleged offence, as incompatible with release on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The bail application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in respect of offences alleged under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: Bail was declined on the basis that the petitioner had not appeared before the department despite notices, had remained absconding for about a year even after filing of the complaint, and was alleged to be the mastermind who created 38 fake firms and wrongfully availed input tax credit to a substantial amount. These circumstances were treated as sufficient to deny release on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to bail.

Final Conclusion: The bail application failed because the Court found the allegations and the petitioner's conduct incompatible with release on bail.

Ratio Decidendi: Absconding conduct, non-cooperation with investigation, and the gravity of the alleged GST fraud can justify of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

---