Shahbaz Haider vs. The State Of Assam And Anr

Held

The Court granted bail to the accused, Shahbaz Haider. The Court acknowledged that while the firm M/s Aida Bitumex was registered in the name of the accused's wife, the accused was operating it. The Court also noted that the accused had been in custody since June 16, 2026, and that some co-accused had already been enlarged on bail. Crucially, the Court found that the material part of the investigation concerning the present accused appeared to be almost completed. Balancing the period of detention undergone by the accused with the nature and gravity of the alleged offense, the Court concluded that further custodial detention might not be warranted for the interest of the investigation. The accused was directed to furnish a bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- with a surety of like amount and to appear before the IO on the first day of every month until the charge sheet is submitted.

Facts

This case involves a bail application filed by Shahbaz Haider, the accused, who has been in custody since June 16, 2026. The case stems from an FIR lodged on May 23, 2026, by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati. The FIR alleges fraudulent activities in violation of the Assam GST Act and various sections of the BNS (Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita). The allegations center on the creation and operation of fictitious business entities to wrongfully avail and falsely claim tax invoices. The accused's firm, M/s Aida Bitumex, along with others, is implicated. The accused claims he is not involved and that the case requires verification of electronic records. He also points out that his wife, the proprietor of M/s Aida Bitumex, and other co-accused have been granted bail.

Key Issues

1. Whether the accused, Shahbaz Haider, is entitled to bail, considering his period of detention and the stage of investigation, under Section 483 of the BNSS? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner contends that he is not involved in the alleged offense, that the case involves verification of electronic records already seized by the Investigating Officer (IO), and that he has been in jail since June 16, 2026. He highlights that his wife, a co-accused and proprietor of M/s Aida Bitumex, has been granted bail. He also states his willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Revenue's arguments: The State argues that although the firm M/s Aida Bitumex is registered in the name of the accused's wife, the accused is the one operating it. They claim the firm fraudulently availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to Rs. 7,33,61,984/- through forged invoices. The State expresses concern about the possibility of the accused misusing liberty if granted bail, given the huge amount of fraudulently availed ITC, which is detrimental to the national economy. They also assert that the investigation is at a crucial stage.