Sandeep Kumar Srivastava vs. Union Of INDIA Prin. Director General, Goods And Services Tax Intelligence Zoal Unit Lko.
Original PDF →Facts
The applicant, Sandeep Kumar Srivastava, an advocate, sought bail in a case registered under Sections 132(1)(b)(c) and (1) of the CGST Act. The Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) arrested him, alleging he issued bogus invoices and filed fraudulent GST returns for 20 years, managed by a co-accused, Nitin Dwivedi. The applicant acted as Dwivedi's advocate. The co-accused, Nitin Dwivedi, had already been granted bail by the High Court, considering the maximum sentence and his willingness to pay a compounding fee. The applicant claimed innocence, false implication, and no criminal history.
Held
The Court allowed the bail application. The primary reasoning was that the applicant was implicated merely because he was acting as an advocate for the co-accused, Nitin Dwivedi. The Court took into consideration that the main co-accused had already been granted bail. The Court found these facts sufficient to make out a case for the applicant's enlargement on bail. The ratio decidendi is that an advocate's professional role in assisting a client, who is later granted bail, can be a sufficient ground for granting bail to the advocate, especially if the advocate has no independent criminal history and claims innocence. The operative direction was to release the applicant on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions including not tampering with evidence, not pressuring witnesses, and appearing on all court dates.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant, an advocate, is entitled to bail given his alleged role in assisting a co-accused in GST evasion, despite the co-accused having been granted bail? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 132 of the CGST Act and principles of bail). Contentions: Petitioner (Applicant): The applicant is innocent, falsely implicated, and has no criminal history. The main co-accused, Nitin Dwivedi, has already been granted bail by this Court. The applicant was merely acting as an advocate for the co-accused. Revenue (Opposite Party - DGGI): The applicant, being an advocate, is well aware of the law and committed misconduct by assisting the co-accused in GST evasion. The offence committed by him is considered more serious due to his professional capacity, and therefore, he is not entitled to bail.
Sections Cited
Section 132
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48741 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7624 of 2025 Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Opposite Party :- Union Of India Prin. Director General, Goods And Services Tax Intelligence Zoal Unit Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Purnendu Chakravarty,Pranjal Jain Counsel for Opposite Party :- Digvijay Nath Dubey,S M Singh Royekwar Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
The counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Shri Purnendu Chakravarty, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri S M Singh Royekwar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence and perused the records.
The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. DGGI/INV/GST/1349/Gr- H/2025, under Sections 132(1)(b)(c) and (1) of CGST Act, registered at Police Station DGGI, District Lucknow.
The applicant has been arrested by the officers of DGGI and it has been stated in the grounds of arrest that the applicant has issued bogus invoices and filed fraudulent GST returns for 20 years managed by co-accused Shri Nitin Dwivedi. The applicant has acted as an Advocate of Nitin Dwivedi, who has already been granted bail by means of an order dated 08.08.2025 passed by this Court in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7382 of 2025 after taking into consideration the fact that the offence alleged carries the maximum sentence of imprisonment for 4-5 years and fine and the said co-accused has expressed willingness to pay the compounding fee.
The learned counsel for the opposite party - DGGI has vehemently opposed the bail applicant and has submitted that the applicant being an advocate, is well aware with the provisions of law and he has committed a misconduct by assisting the co-accused person in evasion of GST. His further submission is that the applicant being an Advocate, the offence for assistance in GST evasion committed by him is even more serious and he is not entitled to be released on bail.
In the affidavit filed in support of bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.
Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the main co-accused has already been granted bail and the applicant has been implicated merely because he was acting as an Advocate for the aforesaid co-accused person, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.
Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Order Date :- 19.8.2025/S. Shivhare SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.