GST fraud and economic offence seriousness justified bail refusal despite magistrate trial and five-year punishment limit

In bail matters arising from alleged GST fraud, serious economic offences involving fake firms, fake invoices and inadmissible input tax credit may justify a stricter approach where investigation material and Section 70 CGST statements indicate a prima facie large-scale misuse of public revenue. The Court treated the alleged conduct as an economic offence of significant magnitude and held that the fact that the offence is triable by a Magistrate or punishable with imprisonment up to five years does not, by itself, warrant release on bail. Parity with a co-accused was also insufficient on the material before the Court, and bail was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted to an alleged to have created and operated fake firms for passing inadmissible input tax credit under the CGST regime, in view of the gravity of the alleged economic offence and the collected material.

Analysis: The allegations were of a large-scale GST fraud involving fake firms, fake invoices and inadmissible input tax credit, supported by statements recorded under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and investigation material. The Court treated the alleged conduct as an economic offence of serious magnitude affecting public revenue, and held that such offences require a different approach while considering bail. It also found no merit in the plea that the offence being triable by a Magistrate and punishable up to five years, by itself, justified release on bail. The rejection of bail granted to the similarly placed co-accused was also taken into account.

Conclusion: Bail was declined and the application was rejected.

Final Conclusion: On the facts of the case, the alleged GST-related economic offence and the supporting material justified refusal of bail.

Ratio Decidendi: In bail matters involving serious economic offences under the GST law, the Court may refuse bail where the material indicates a prima facie large-scale fraud and misuse of public revenue, and parity or the maximum punishment alone does not compel release.

---