The Meerut Court has rejected the bail plea of an industrialist, Sanjay Kumar Jain allegedly involved in Rs. 29.37 crore Goods and Service Tax (GST) evasion case.
The bench of Achal Narain Saklani (Additional Sessions Judge) has observed that Economic offences constitute a class apart and need to be visited with a different approach in the matter of bail. The economic offences having deep-rooted conspiracies and involving huge loss of public funds need to be viewed seriously and considered as grave offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and by posing serious threat to the financial health of the country.
The controversy traces back to an inquiry launched by the DGGI against M/s Sarvottam Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd., a Muzaffarnagar-based iron and steel manufacturer. Investigators alleged that between July 2022 and January 2024, the company supplied large quantities of goods without issuing genuine invoices, thereby evading GST.
A search at a third-party residence (belonging to one Ashutosh, alias Ashu) led to the seizure of laptops, mobile phones, and pen drives. Forensic analysis allegedly revealed WhatsApp messages and data showing secret supplies and creation of fake invoices to camouflage sales. Jain, as the director and key decision-maker of the company, was accused of personally benefiting from these cash transactions.
The DGGI claims this activity resulted in GST evasion worth Rs. 29.37 crore, making the offence cognizable and non-bailable under Section 132(1)(a) & (i) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Lakshya Kumar Singh, Special Prosecutor on behalf of the department argued that Jain was the main beneficiary of the illegal supplies. He handled all sale and purchase operations of the company. The scale of evasion — far above the Rs. 5 crore threshold — made the offence serious enough to warrant continued detention.
Jain’s counsel Parvez Alam strongly contested the arrest, raising constitutional and procedural violations. Grounds of arrest were not supplied forthwith, violating Section 69 of the CGST Act and Article 22(1) of the Constitution. Jain was allegedly held in illegal custody for over 13 hours before his arrest was formally recorded at 3:05 AM on August 8, 2025. The arrest memo contained irregularities — absence of Document Identification Number (DIN), overwriting, and vague charges without specifying the exact clause invoked. The evidence is based only on third-party WhatsApp chats and statements, with no corroboration through raw material purchase, electricity use, or transportation records.
The defence also argued that Jain is a law-abiding senior citizen, suffering from health issues, with a wife who is a heart patient dependent on him. His company, they stressed, paid ₹186.96 crore in electricity bills over three years, proving legitimate industrial operations.
The court after considering these facts, gravity of the offence as well as in the light of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court related to economic offences,held that it would not be proper to enlarge him on bail.
Case Details
Case Title: Sanjay Kumar Jain Versus UOI, DGGI Meerut
Case No.: Bail application No. 4301 of 2025
Date: 27.08.2025
Counsel For Applicant: Parvez Alam
Counsel For Respondent: Lakshya Kumar Singh
