Prolonged custody and parity with co-accused justified regular bail in alleged GST fake invoice case

Regular bail was granted in a case involving alleged bogus input tax credit and fake paper transactions under the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court noted that the petitioner had remained in custody for more than one year, the offences were triable by a Magistrate, and the trial was likely to take time. It also relied on parity, as the attributed role arose from a co-accused's statement and that co-accused had already been granted bail. The Court did not examine the merits of the allegations and ordered release on furnishing the requisite bail and surety bonds.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail in a case involving alleged bogus input tax credit and fake paper transactions under the Haryana Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The petitioner had remained in custody for more than one year. The offences were triable by the Court of Magistrate and the trial was likely to take time. The role attributed to the petitioner arose on the basis of a statement of a co-accused, who had already been granted bail. The order proceeded without any examination of the merits of the allegations.

Conclusion: Regular bail was granted to the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded and the petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on furnishing the requisite bail and surety bonds.

Ratio Decidendi: In a bail matter, prolonged custody, the likelihood of delay in trial, and parity with a co-accused may justify grant of bail without entering into the merits of the ations.

---