Md. Naushad vs. The State Of Assam

Held

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, Md. Naushad. The Court noted that the petitioner is an employee of M/s Aida Bitumex, a firm that allegedly availed a total input tax credit of Rs. 7,33,61,984/- from the financial year 2021-2022 to 2024-2025 through fraudulent and forged means, and that the petitioner received a commission from the profits. The Court also observed that the petitioner has been in custody since 15.06.2026 and that some co-accused persons have already been granted bail. Balancing the period of detention undergone by the accused with the nature and gravity of the alleged offense, the Court was of the view that further custodial detention of the petitioner may not be warranted in the interest of investigation. The petitioner was directed to furnish a bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati.

Facts

The petitioner, Md. Naushad, is an accused in Special Task Force PS Case No. 02/2026, registered on 23.05.2026 based on an FIR lodged by an Assistant Commissioner of State Tax. The allegations involve fraudulent activities in violation of the Assam GST Act and the BNS, through the creation of fictitious business entities and wrongful availment of tax invoices in the names of non-existent taxpayers and the accused's firm. The petitioner was arrested on 15.06.2026 and has been in custody since. The dispute involves alleged input tax credit (ITC) of Rs. 7,33,61,984/- obtained through fraudulent means and forged invoices. The petitioner claims to be a mere employee of M/s Aida Bitumex, involved only in transportation and leading of Bitumen, and that co-accused have been granted bail.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, Md. Naushad, an employee of M/s Aida Bitumex, is entitled to bail in connection with Special Task Force PS Case No. 02/2026, registered for alleged violations of the Assam GST Act and BNS, involving fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to Rs. 7,33,61,984/-? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner contends that he is merely an employee of M/s Aida Bitumex and not involved in the alleged offense. He argues that the case requires verification of electronic records and evidence already seized by the Investigating Officer (IO). He highlights his period of detention since 15.06.2026 and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation. Furthermore, he points out that co-accused have already been enlarged on bail. Revenue's Arguments: The State respondent argues that the accused is an employee of the firm that availed ITC of Rs. 7,33,61,984/- through fraudulent and forged invoices, which is detrimental to the national economy. The State asserts that the accused used to obtain financial benefits monthly from the firm and that the investigation is at a crucial stage, necessitating the dismissal of the bail petition.