Bail in CGST fake invoice case granted where evidence was documentary, credit reversed, and flight risk was unproven.

In a CGST Act prosecution alleging fraudulent input tax credit through fake invoices, the HC granted bail under Section 439 CrPC because custody was not shown to be necessary for investigation or trial. The Court noted that a substantial part of the credit had already been reversed, the evidence was mainly documentary and electronic, and no real risk of tampering with evidence or absconding was established. Applying settled bail principles, it held that continued detention was unwarranted and directed release on conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicants, facing prosecution for alleged fraudulent availing of input tax credit under the CGST Act, were entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The allegation concerned issuance of fake invoices and fraudulent availment of input tax credit, but a substantial part of the credit had already been reversed. The Court considered the length of incarceration, the maximum sentence indicated for the alleged offence, the nature of the evidence as principally documentary and electronic, and the absence of a shown risk of tampering with evidence or absconding. The Court also applied the settled principles that bail is ordinarily to be granted where custody is not required for investigation or trial, particularly where the case does not disclose any special circumstance justifying continued detention.

Conclusion: The applicants were held entitled to bail.

Final Conclusion: The bail application was allowed and the applicants were directed to be released on conditions imposed by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under the CGST Act, bail may be granted where the evidence is predominantly documentary and electronic, a substantial amount has been reversed, and no real apprehension of flight risk or tampering with evidence is shown.

---