The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench has granted the bail to the person involved in wrongfully claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Goods and Service Tax (GST).
The bench of Justice Anand Sharma has allowed the bail application on furnishing personal bond of Rs.5,00,000/- along with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. The accused-petitioner was granted bail subject to various conditions.
Firstly, he shall not tamper with any evidence, nor would influence the witnesses in the case.
Secondly, he shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.
Thirdly, he shall deposit the passport before the concerned Authority. He shall co-operate in the trial and shall attend each and every date of hearing in the trial, until and unless his presence is exempted by the trial Court.
Lastly, in case, the conditions are not complied by the accused-petitioner, thus the respondent-prosecution shall be free to move for cancellation bail application.
The bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. in connection with FIR for the offences under Sections 132(1), (c), (f), (h) and (i) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
The petitioner submits that the maximum punishment to be awarded for the alleged offences is 5 years. There are no criminal antecedents against the petitioner and the petitioner is behind the bars since 04.01.2025. Charge-sheet has already been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.2269/2025, Vineet Jain Vs. Union of India decided on 28.04.2025.
The petitioner contended that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation during trial and the documents as relied on by the respondent in criminal complaint or charge sheet are bulky, hence the trial is likely to take considerable time, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be allowed.
The department contended that the conduct of the petitioner is that earlier also on issuing summons by CGST Department, he did not appear for giving statements, hence, there is likelihood that the petitioner will abscond in case he is granted bail. The economic offence may be treated as a class part, therefore, the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.
The court while allowing the petition enlarged the petitioner on bail.
Case Details
Case Title: Mahesh Sharma Versus UOI
Case No.: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 3459/2025
Date: 09/06/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Manish Sharma, Adv.
Counsel For Respondent: Kinshuk Jain, Spl. PP.
