The Supreme Court has granted bail to a dry-fruit trader accused of evading GST of more than ₹55 crore by allegedly keeping several transactions outside his books and selling goods without issuing tax invoices.
The Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran has observed that the charge sheet had already been filed and that no further custodial interrogation of the accused was required.
The petitioner had been arrested on June 2, 2026, in connection with offences alleged under Sections 132(1)(a), 132(1)(i) and 132(5) of the Rajasthan Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. By the time the matter came before the Supreme Court, he had remained in custody for two months and 24 days.
Buy Now: Supreme Court Judgments E-Compilation – August 2026
The petitioner was engaged in the sale of dry fruits and had allegedly suppressed several purchase and sale transactions during the financial years 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25.
It was alleged that the transactions were deliberately omitted from the books of account and that no tax invoices were issued in respect of those supplies.
On this basis, the authorities accused the petitioner of evading tax amounting to Rs. 55,06,20,882.
The criminal proceedings arose from the FIR. The petitioner’s applications for bail had been rejected successively by the lower courts and the Rajasthan High Court.
Senior Advocate Naveen Pahwa, Adv. Vikram Gogra and Vaibhav Gogra. appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the accused did not have any previous criminal antecedents.
It was further argued that the investigation had progressed to the stage where the charge sheet had already been filed. Continued incarceration was therefore unnecessary, particularly when the investigating authorities no longer required the petitioner for custodial interrogation.
The petitioner sought bail on the ground that the investigation had substantially concluded and the evidence collected by the authorities had already been placed before the competent court.
After considering the material placed before it, the Supreme Court formed a prima facie opinion that the petitioner could be released on bail.
The Bench placed particular emphasis on two circumstances: the filing of the charge sheet and the absence of any further requirement for custodial interrogation.
“On a prima facie consideration of the material on record, we are of the opinion that the petitioner can be released on bail, as charge sheet has been filed and no further custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required,” the Court observed.
The Supreme Court accordingly ordered the petitioner’s release on bail.
The Court, however, left it to the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur Metropolitan-II, to impose such terms and conditions as may be considered fit and appropriate.
The petitioner was also directed to appear before the jurisdictional court within two weeks.
The Supreme Court’s decision was based on a prima facie assessment of the material for the limited purpose of deciding the bail application.
The order does not contain any finding on whether the alleged suppression of transactions or GST evasion actually occurred. Those issues will remain subject to adjudication during the criminal proceedings on the basis of the evidence produced by the prosecution and the defence.
Similarly, the Court did not examine the correctness of the alleged tax-evasion figure of ₹55.06 crore or determine the petitioner’s liability under the Rajasthan GST Act.
The principal consideration before the Bench was whether continued custody remained necessary after completion of the investigation and filing of the charge sheet.
With the direction to release the petitioner on bail, the Supreme Court disposed of the Special Leave Petition. All pending applications connected with the matter were also disposed of.
