2025 (2) TMI 1223 - HC - GST

Bail Granted for Accused in Fake ITC Case Under Magistrate's Jurisdiction, With Bond Conditions

Parvej Versus Union of India, through Special P.P.

The HC allowed the bail application of the accused-petitioner involved in availing fake ITC through bogus invoices. Noting the offences are triable by a ... Seeking grant of bail - petitioner availed fake/bogus ITC for the firms opened by him and his employees on the basis of invoices without supplying the goods - HELD THAT:- Considering the fact that the alleged offences are triable by magistrate, complaint has been filed against the petitioner in the court concerned; till date, tax liability has not been determined; he is in custody since 18.11.2024 and trial will take time in its conclusion but without commenting anything on the merits/demerits of the case, commenting anything on merits and demerits of the case, it is deemed proper to allow the bail application. This bail application is accordingly allowed and it is directed that accused-petitioner- Parvez S/o Shri Shoukat Khan shall be released on bail provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- together with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court and any court to which the matter is transferred, on all subsequent dates of hearing and as and when called upon to do so. Bail application allowed. The Rajasthan High Court, through Hon'ble Justice Anil Kumar Upman, granted bail to the accused petitioner under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, arrested for offences under Section 132(1)(B)(C)(F) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner was alleged to have availed fake/bogus input tax credit (ITC) through firms purportedly opened by him and his employees. The court noted that four of the five firms investigated had no connection with the petitioner, and the petitioner's firm was not found fake, with no fake ITC received; the petitioner had also deposited due GST timely. The petitioner denied statements recorded under Section 70 of the Act and tax liability remains undetermined. The offences are triable by a magistrate with a maximum punishment of five years. Relying on the Apex Court's ruling in Rajiv Jindal v. State of UP, which held that 'in absence of any antecedents, there is no reason to deny bail to an accused in a case triable by magistrate,' the court found bail appropriate. The court emphasized that the decision was without prejudice to the merits of the case. Bail was granted on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each, with the condition that the petitioner appear for all court proceedings. The order underscores the balance between protecting the economic interest of the State and safeguarding the accused's right to liberty pending trial.