Bail in fake invoice GST case turns on subordinate role, collected evidence, and low risk of tampering.

Bail was granted in a CGST prosecution alleging fraudulent availment and passing of input tax credit through fake invoices. The court treated the applicant's role as subordinate to the main accused, noting that he had acted as a tax consultant on instructions and that the principal documentary and digital evidence had already been collected. It also relied on the absence of criminal antecedents, local roots, and the limited risk of tampering with evidence, concluding that continued custody was unnecessary while investigation could proceed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to bail in a prosecution alleging fraudulent availment and passing of input tax credit through fake invoices under the Central Goods and Services Tax regime.

Analysis: The applicant was stated to be in custody from the date of arrest, while the prosecution material showed that the core documentary and digital evidence had already been collected. The role attributed to the applicant was treated as subordinate to the principal accused, and the record indicated that he was working as a tax consultant on instructions of the main accused. The Court also noted the absence of criminal antecedents, local roots, the limited possibility of tampering with evidence, and the absence of any apparent need for continued custody where investigation could proceed without further detention.

Conclusion: The applicant was held entitled to bail.

---