Sourav Bajoria vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court rejected the petitioner's prayer for bail. The Court found that the allegations constituted a huge economic offence, necessitating a thorough and detailed investigation. Considering the materials collected by the investigating agency regarding the manipulation of invoices and the petitioner's role in facilitating the commission of the offence, the Court held that releasing the petitioner on bail at this stage was likely to hamper the investigation and tamper with evidence. The Court also noted the complexity of the investigation, involving a large number of documents to be examined at different levels and places, requiring sufficient time for the investigating agency. Therefore, the Court concluded that the prayer for bail stood rejected at this stage.

Facts

The petitioner, Sourav Bajoria, sought bail in connection with GST Case No. CGST/DGGI/GST/1928/2021, under Section 132(5) of the Central Goods and Service Act, 2017. The case involves allegations of generating invoices without actual supply of goods and fraudulent availing/passing of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by one Amit Kumar, operating under the trade name M/s Maruti Traders. Incriminating documents, including fake invoices and E-way bills, were recovered from various locations, including the petitioner's office. The petitioner, a Tax Consultant for M/s Maruti Traders, is accused of arranging and preparing accounts based on fabricated documents. The alleged tax evasion amounts to Rs. 28,97,85,917/-.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner, as a Tax Consultant, has an individual role in the commission of the alleged economic offence, or if he merely performed his duties based on provided materials? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning Section 132(5) of the CGST Act). Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner is a Tax Consultant and had no individual role in the offence, having acted solely on the materials provided to him. He has been in custody for one month, and further detention is not necessary for the investigation. Revenue's arguments: The petitioner actively collected fake invoices and E-way bills and was in league with the co-accused Amit Kumar. Materials on record suggest his active involvement, including procuring fake bills from various entities across states. The investigation is ongoing, and the economic offence involves a huge amount of tax evasion (Rs. 28,97,85,917/-). Evidence of manipulated E-way bills, where vehicles did not reach their stated destinations, further implicates the petitioner. The gravity of economic offences necessitates a strict approach to bail.