Smti Renu Sunar vs. The State Of Ap

Held

The Court considered the submissions and the Case Diary. Regarding the allegations of fraudulent transactions totaling Rs. 1,09,11,404/-, the Court noted that the accused, along with Shri Ravi Rai, met the complainant and obtained the GST User ID and Password for business purposes. The Court found that, prima facie, the accused persons used the complainant's GST Account ID and Password for fraudulent transactions. The Court also addressed the petitioner's arguments regarding illegal arrest and detention. It found that the provisions of law concerning arrest and transit remand were duly complied with by the arresting authority, refuting the claim of illegality. The Court also stated that a preliminary inquiry might not be required if a cognizable offense is found. Consequently, the Court held that the accused is not entitled to bail at this stage, as he prima facie appears to be involved in the case, and other individuals also seem to be involved in the alleged fraudulent transaction of GST account details. The bail application was rejected.

Facts

Smti Renu Sunar filed an application under Section 483 of BNSS, 2023, for the release of the accused, Shri Harka Bahadur Sonar @ Sumit Sonar, on bail. The accused was arrested on 03.09.2025 in connection with Naharlagun P.S. Case No. 83/2025, under Sections 316(4)/3(5) of BNS, 2023. The FIR was registered on 28.06.2025 based on a complaint alleging that the accused, along with Shri Ravi Rai, used the complainant's firm's GST User ID and Password for fraudulent transactions involving cement bag supplies worth crores. The complainant's GST account allegedly received Input Tax Credit of Rs. 65,71,656/- from M/s SK Enterprise and Rs. 43,39,748/- from M/s Nagar Trades, which was then sold to other firms. The GST Office blocked Rs. 1,09,11,404/- to prevent further fraudulent transactions.

Key Issues

1. Whether the accused, Shri Harka Bahadur Sonar @ Sumit Sonar, is entitled to bail given the allegations of fraudulent GST transactions (Sections 316(4)/3(5) of BNS, 2023)? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that the accused is falsely implicated as the GST User ID, Password, and OTP are solely in the complainant's possession, implying the complainant is responsible for any misuse. They contended that the accused has no relation to the firms mentioned and no knowledge of the fraudulent transactions. Furthermore, the petitioner argued that the arrest was illegal, violating the principles laid down in Lalita Kumari v. Government of U.P. regarding preliminary investigation, and that the arrest and detention from Harmuti outside the jurisdiction without informing local police and obtaining transit remand were illegal, violating Article 21 of the Constitution. Respondent's arguments: The State argued that the accused is not cooperating with the investigation and that releasing him on bail would risk witness inducement/threat and hamper the investigation. They asserted that there is prima facie material against the accused and co-accused, indicating their involvement in fraudulent transactions using the complainant's GST account ID and Password. The State also submitted that since other accused are involved, the present accused is not entitled to bail.