https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450760 The Rajasthan HC dismissed a bail application for an accused involved in creating 294 fake firms and evading GST. The petitioner argued entitlement to bail since the offense under Section 132 CGST Act carries maximum five years imprisonment and is triable by Magistrate First Class. The HC rejected this argument, holding that bail decisions cannot follow a rigid formula based solely on punishment quantum or trial court jurisdiction. Each application must be evaluated on individual facts and circumstances. Citing SC precedent in Nimmagadda Prasad case, the court emphasized considering nature of accusations, evidence, punishment severity, accused's character, and public interest. Given the serious allegations, evidence collected by DGGI, and rejection of co-accused's bail application, the court declined to grant bail. en-us Wed, 06 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Apr 2025 15:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450760 The Rajasthan HC dismissed a bail application for an accused involved in creating 294 fake firms and evading GST. The petitioner argued entitlement to bail since the offense under Section 132 CGST Act carries maximum five years imprisonment and is triable by Magistrate First Class. The HC rejected this argument, holding that bail decisions cannot follow a rigid formula based solely on punishment quantum or trial court jurisdiction. Each application must be evaluated on individual facts and circumstances. Citing SC precedent in Nimmagadda Prasad case, the court emphasized considering nature of accusations, evidence, punishment severity, accused's character, and public interest. Given the serious allegations, evidence collected by DGGI, and rejection of co-accused's bail application, the court declined to grant bail. Case-Laws GST Wed, 06 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450760