Bail in fake invoice GST prosecution declined where alleged organised fraud, witness risk, and flight risk outweighed custody arguments.

Bail was declined in a CGST Act prosecution involving alleged fake firms, bogus invoices, and fraudulent input tax credit on a large scale. The court treated the record as showing substantial involvement in creating and operating fictitious entities, supported by recovery of incriminating material and statements implicating the applicant. It weighed the gravity of the alleged economic offence, the scale of tax evasion, the risk of witness influence or destruction of evidence, and the apprehension of flight risk, and found those factors outweighed arguments based on prolonged custody and parity at this stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant accused in a prosecution under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was entitled to bail.

Analysis: The prosecution alleged creation of fake firms, issuance of bogus invoices without supply of goods or services, and fraudulent availment and passing on of input tax credit on a large scale. The record was treated as showing substantial involvement of the applicant in the formation and operation of fictitious entities, recovery of incriminating material, and statements implicating the applicant in the offence. The Court weighed the nature and gravity of the economic offence, the magnitude of the alleged tax evasion, the possibility of influencing witnesses or destroying evidence, and the apprehension of flight risk. The Court also considered the argument based on prolonged custody and parity, but found that the seriousness of the allegations and the material on record outweighed those considerations at this stage.

Conclusion: Bail was declined and the applicant was not found entitled to release on bail.

---