The Rajasthan High Court has refused to grant bail to an accused, Hansraj Gurjar involved in an alleged large-scale GST fraud case, observing that economic offences involving deep-rooted conspiracies and substantial loss to the public exchequer must be dealt with a strict approach.
The bench of Justice Praveer Bhatnagar dismissed the bail application filed by Hansraj Gurjar, who was arrested by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Jaipur Zonal Unit, in connection with offences under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The case pertains to a well-organized syndicate allegedly engaged in generating fake invoices, bogus e-way bills, and fictitious transport documents without actual supply of goods, thereby facilitating fraudulent availment and passing of Input Tax Credit (ITC). According to the prosecution, the accused played a key role in operating shell firms and routing fake transactions involving marble and granite across the country.
Buy Now: GST Monthly E-Compilation : March 2026
The DGGI informed the Court that the magnitude of tax evasion in the case is approximately ₹48.41 crore, making the offence cognizable and non-bailable. The investigation further revealed the use of non-existent transport entities and fabricated documentation to simulate movement of goods, while in reality no supply had taken place.
The Court noted that material collected during the investigation, including documentary evidence and statements recorded under Section 70 of the CGST Act, prima facie established the petitioner’s active involvement in the alleged fraud. It was further observed that the accused was not merely a facilitator but appeared to be an integral part of the conspiracy, allegedly orchestrating fake firms and transactions.
Rejecting the contention that prolonged custody alone justified bail, the Court held that the seriousness of the offence and the scale of financial irregularities outweigh the argument of extended incarceration. The bench emphasized that economic offences constitute a separate class of crimes due to their impact on the nation’s financial health and must be treated with greater caution.
The Court clarified that Section 480(6) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which provides for bail where trial is delayed, does not confer an absolute right to bail. The provision is discretionary and courts may deny bail based on the facts and gravity of the case.
The Court also relied on principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. CBI, reiterating that offences involving huge loss of public funds and deep-rooted conspiracies require a stricter approach while considering bail applications.
The Court observed that such fraudulent ITC schemes not only undermine the GST framework but also pose a serious threat to the financial stability of the country.
Case Details
Case Title: Hansraj Gurjar Versus UOI
Citation: JURISHOUR-866-HC-2026(RAJ)Â
Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 16428/2025
Date: 18 .04.2026
Counsel For Petitioner: Sr. Adv Madhav Mitra
Counsel For Respondent: Sr. Adv. Kinshuk Jain
Read More: CBI to Launch ‘Abhay’ AI Chatbot to Verify Fake Notices
