The Bombay High Court has granted the interim anticipatory bail to Mumbai CGST Officer, Abhishek Katiyar for Offering Bribe to DGGI SIO.
The bench of Justice N.R. Borkar has granted interim anticipatory bail to Mumbai CGST Officer, Abhishek Katiyar in ₹22 Lakh CBI bribery trap case till the next date i.e. 07/11/2025.
The bench directed the applicant, Mumbai CGST Officer to appear before the concerned investigating officer on 28th October 2025 and 29th October 2025 and shall cooperate in the investigation.
The Applicant, Abhishek Katiyar is serving as a Superintendent in the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST), presently posted in the Post-Audit Section, GST Office, Mumbai Commissionerate (East), Mumbai. He is named as Accused No. 1 in the FIR lodged with CBI for alleged offences under Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The case arises from a complaint filed by Vivek Pratap Singh, an officer attached to the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Durgapur Regional Unit, West Bengal, whose role involves gathering intelligence relating to GST evasion by offshore online betting platforms.
According to the prosecution, during the course of his official duties, the complainant came across instances of non-compliance involving websites such as www.lordexch.com, www.lorsexch.com, and www.lotusbook247.com. Upon scrutiny, it was found through the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) that these websites were using a common payment gateway linked to Artimbe IT Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Appnit Technologies Pvt. Ltd., with Mr. Nitin Kapoor shown as Director.
The complainant issued a notice to Appnit Technologies Pvt. Ltd. seeking KYC documents, account opening forms, and bank statements. He also contacted Mr. Kapoor in this regard. It is alleged that on 14 August 2025, Advocate Ms. Priyanka (Accused No. 2) telephonically contacted the complainant and offered to “settle” the matter. The complainant refused the offer and insisted on compliance through official channels. Subsequently, on 15 August 2025, the Applicant allegedly called the complainant, introducing himself as a GST Officer from Mumbai, and inquired about the ongoing inquiry.
The prosecution alleged that on 17 August 2025, the Applicant offered a bribe of Rs. 1 crore, or any other negotiated amount, to settle the inquiry against Artimbe IT Pvt. Ltd. and Appnit Technologies Pvt. Ltd. The offer was allegedly reiterated on 22 August and 26 August 2025, and was finally settled at Rs. 22 lakh, with the delivery to be made in Delhi.
Following this, the CBI conducted a verification at Kolkata and organized a trap operation at Delhi. It is stated that during the trap, two individuals, R.S. Thakur and Sachin Kumar Gupta, were apprehended at Connaught Place, New Delhi, while allegedly delivering ₹22,00,500, claimed to be the agreed bribe amount.
Dr. Sujay Kantawala, on behalf of the Applicant contended that the cause of action, as per the Complainant’s own version, first arose on 14.08.2025, when the initial alleged offer was purportedly made by Priyanka Singh. However, the complaint came to be filed only on 28.08.2025, after an unexplained delay of nearly fourteen days. The inordinate and unexplained delay in approaching the authorities casts serious doubt on the genuineness of the allegations and indicates that the complaint is an afterthought, possibly engineered with mala fide intent. The absence of any immediate reporting despite multiple alleged interactions during the intervening period undermines the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
Dr. Kantawala contended that all documentary evidence, including relevant files, are reportedly at Durgapur in West Bengal, and the Applicant, serving in Mumbai, would have no additional information to contribute under custodial interrogation as he is a very junior officer and is not in any position to influence the investigations being conducted in West Bengal. The applicant’s case is that he was in Calcutta in respect of body building competition and Durgapur is 170 Km away from Calcutta.
Dr. Kantawala contended that he has been falsely implicated in the case and has no connection with the alleged transactions. On 01 September 2025, a search was conducted at his residence in Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, by the CBI between 7:45 p.m. and 11:10 p.m., during which his mother, wife, and children were present. He asserts that neither he nor his family members were provided a copy of the search authorization. The CBI allegedly seized loose papers and prepared an inventory of jewellery items belonging to his wife, mother, and sister-in-law, all of whom live in a joint family. The items were personal belongings of the women in the family.
The Special CBI Court at Sessions in Mumbai had earlier rejected the anticiapatory bail application.
The High Court has listed the anticipatory bail application on 07/11/2025 and has directed that the Applicant shall appear before the investigating officer of CBI (ACB) on 28th October 2025 and 29th October 2025.
The court ordered that till the next date, the Applicant shall not be arrested.
Case Details
Case Title: Abhishek Katiyar Versus UOI
Case No.: ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.2915 OF 2025
Date: 17/10/2025
Counsel For Applicant: Dr. Sujay Kantawala
Counsel For Respondent: Amit Munde
Read More: Wrongful GST ITC Availment | Mumbai Court Grants Bail to Trader Accused of Rs. 6.85 Crore
