2022 (2) TMI 1049 - HC - GST

Seeking grant of Regular Bail - preparation of fake invoices and availment Input Tax Credit (ITC) and its monetization through refunds - HELD THAT - It may be debatable as to whether the role of the petitioner is confined to preparing forged documents at the instance of the co-accused or as to whether he was part and parcel of the larger conspiracy pursuant to which a loss of ₹ 21.60 crores was caused to the government on account of availing Input Tax Credit on the basis of forged documents. Without commenting any further on the merits of the case and while noticing that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last about 8 months and otherwise has a clean record, the petition is accepted and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Grant of regular bail in a case involving charges under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471/120-B IPC related to fraudulent activities in availing Input Tax Credit (ITC) and forging documents.

Analysis:

1. Allegations and Charges:
The case involved a petitioner seeking regular bail in a matter where multiple firms were accused of preparing fake invoices, availing Input Tax Credit (ITC), and monetizing refunds through fraudulent means. The petitioner, along with other accused, was alleged to have conspired to commit fraud by preparing fake invoices amounting to a significant sum and availing ITC from the government through forged identities and documents.

2. Defense and Prosecution Arguments:
The petitioner's counsel argued that the FIR was a misuse of the legal process and amounted to double jeopardy since a similar complaint had been filed previously. It was contended that the petitioner was not a beneficiary of the alleged fraudulent activities and had been running a cyber cafe, not expected to scrutinize all customers' documents thoroughly. On the other hand, the State counsel argued that the petitioner played an active role in the conspiracy by forging identities and documents, contributing to the overall fraud scheme.

3. Judicial Decision:
After considering the arguments presented, the court acknowledged the debate regarding the extent of the petitioner's involvement in the conspiracy and the financial loss caused to the government. Despite the ongoing similar complaint, the court noted the petitioner's prolonged custody and clean record. Consequently, the court granted the petitioner regular bail, emphasizing his release on furnishing bail or surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court or relevant judicial authority.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key aspects of the case, including the nature of charges, defense arguments, prosecution stance, and the ultimate decision of the court regarding the grant of regular bail to the petitioner.