Bail declined in alleged fake-firm GST fraud where prima facie material showed a principal role in bogus invoicing and tax credit misuse.

Bail was declined in allegations of a fake-firm GST fraud involving bogus invoices, wrongful input tax credit and allied offences. The Court relied on complaint material, the prosecution report, cognizance order and statements of persons connected with the firms to treat the petitioner as the alleged mastermind behind a wider network of fictitious entities. The plea based on a circular and parity with a co-accused was rejected because the petitioner's role was found distinct and more serious. Given the gravity of the alleged economic offence and prima facie support for forgery, fraud and GST evasion, bail was not warranted and the application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in a case alleging creation and management of fake firms for issuance of bogus GST invoices and wrongful passing of inadmissible input tax credit, along with allied offences.

Analysis: The complaint, prosecution report and cognizance order disclosed material alleging that the petitioner was the mastermind behind a large network of fake entities used for bogus invoicing and fraudulent input tax credit, causing substantial revenue loss. The Court found the allegations to be supported by verified materials, statements of persons connected with the firms, and the cognizance taken for offences under the CGST Act and the Indian Penal Code. The plea based on a circular and the reliance on parity with a co-accused was not accepted, as the petitioner's role was treated as distinct and more serious. In view of the gravity of the alleged economic offence and the nature of the accusations, the Court held that bail was not warranted.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to bail and the bail application was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: In bail matters involving serious economic offences supported by prima facie material of forgery, fraud and large-scale GST evasion, the Court may decline bail where the accused is alleged to be the principal architect of the offence and parity with another accused is not established.

---