Bail in alleged GST fraud can be refused where a prima facie case and tampering risk justify continued custody.

Bail may be refused in serious GST economic offences where the material shows a prima facie case of bogus invoice issuance, suppression of actual movement of goods and alleged tax evasion. The court treated the alleged paper transaction network, absence of physical stock, and recorded admissions as indicating a serious offence, and held that the investigation was at a crucial stage. Because there was a real apprehension of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses, the usual bail considerations were outweighed and custody was continued during investigation.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged issuance of bogus GST invoices, suppression of actual movement of goods, and alleged evasion of tax under the CGST regime.

Analysis: The allegations disclosed a large-scale economic offence involving the creation of a paper transaction network, absence of physical stock at the registered premises, alleged admissions in voluntary statements, and substantial tax evasion. The Court treated the offence as serious in nature and considered that the investigation was still at a crucial stage, with a possibility of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses. In these circumstances, the usual considerations for bail were outweighed by the gravity of the offence and the need for effective investigation.

Conclusion: Bail was declined.

Final Conclusion: The applications for release on bail were rejected because the Court found the alleged GST evasion to be a serious economic offence warranting continued custody during investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: In cases involving serious economic offences under the GST regime, bail may be refused where the material shows a prima facie case, the investigation is at a crucial stage, and there is a real apprehension of tampering with evidence or obstructing the inquiry.

---