TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 634
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for brevity, 'BNSS') by the accused-petitioner, who was arrested in connection with Case No. F. No. DGGI/INT/INTL/755/2025-Gr-N registered by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Jaipur Zonal Unit, Jaipur, for the offences punishable under Sections 132(1)(a), 132(1)(f), 132(1)(h) and 132(1)(l) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for brevity, 'CGST Act'). 2. It is contended by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the accused-petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no involvement in the alleged offence. It is contended that the respondent agency- DGGI has registered the present case solely on the basis of statements ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s similar relief. 4. It is further contended that the entire prosecution case rests upon statements allegedly recorded under coercion and there is no independent corroborative evidence connecting the petitioner with the alleged offence. Furthermore, it was argued that even the statement of co-accused Narendra Choudhary recorded on 12.08.2025 does not find mention of the name of the accused petitioner amongst the alleged accomplices, therefore, the respondent does not have any legally admissible material against the accused-petitioner except the petitioner's own statement, which is alleged to have been recorded under pressure. 5. Learned counsel further submits that the investigation stands concluded and the complaint has already been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r has cooperated throughout the investigation, there is no likelihood of his absconding or tampering with the prosecution evidence and he undertakes to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court, therefore, it is prayed that considering the subsequent grant of bail to the co-accused on the principle of parity and the prolonged period of incarceration undergone by the accused-petitioner, the present bail application may be allowed. 7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent has vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the case of the present petitioner is not on similar footing with that of the other co-accused who has been granted bail by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, therefore, the principle o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Hon'ble Supreme Court, there exists no change in circumstances which warrants reconsideration. It is further contended that completion of six months' custody does not confer any statutory right upon the petitioner to seek bail under the CGST Act and the contention regarding absence of a show cause notice is wholly misconceived. 10. Lastly, it is submitted that economic offences constitute a class apart and require a stricter approach while considering the prayer for bail, therefore, considering the magnitude of the alleged tax evasion, the petitioner's dominant role in the conspiracy and the possibility of influencing witnesses, it is prayed that the instant second bail application deserves to be dismissed. 11. Heard learned c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....idual role of the accused before extending the benefit of bail and observed as under:- "10. The question that arises for consideration is whether, as done by the High Court in the impugned order, parity with the co-accused persons can be the sole reason for granting bail. Bail has often been stated to be the rule, and jail, the exception. This cannot be emphasized enough. At the same time, this, however, does not mean that the relief of bail is to be granted without due regard to the circumstances involved in the alleged offence for which the accused person has been arrested. In this regard, it has to be noted that a Court, while granting bail, has to consider a number of aspects... 11. It is clear from the perusal of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....il. The material collected during investigation prima facie indicates the involvement of the accused petitioner in creation and operation of fictitious firms, generation of fake invoices and e-way bills and facilitation of clandestine movement of goods resulting in alleged GST evasion to the tune of approximately Rs. 48,41,21,094 and the documentary evidence, electronic evidence, WhatsApp chats and statements recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act prima facie disclose the petitioner's direct and substantial involvement in the commission of the alleged offences. Thus, the role attributed to the petitioner is different and substantially graver than that of the co-accused- Narendra Choudhary and hence, the order granting bail to the co-accu....