Judgment
[2026:RJ-JP:33281] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 11169/2026 CNR: RJHC020668992026 | URN: CRLMB / 20652U / 2026 Jagdish S/o Amraram, R/o 10, Rwd Village Keharwal, Tehsil Tibbi, District Hanumangarh (Raj.) At Present Resident Of Near Johad, Ward No. 2, Village Nanakpur, Tehsil And District Sirsa (Haryana) (At Present In Central Jail, Jaipur).
----Petitioner Versus Union Of India, Through Special Pp ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Jitendra Singh Poonia Special PP DGGI with Mr. Santosh Kumar Meena, Sr.
Inteligence Officer for DGGS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Order 19/08/2026 1.
The instant bail application has been filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 on behalf of the accused-applicant. The accused-applicant was arrested in connection with File No.
DGGI/INT/INTL/702/2025-Gr-M-O/o-DD-DGGI-RU-Udaipur, registered by the office of the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Regional Unit, Udaipur, for the offence(s) punishable under Section 132(1)(i) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.
2.
Learned counsel for the accused-applicant has submitted that there is a material change in circumstances since the passing of the earlier dismissed order by this Court. It is submitted that
[2026:RJ-JP:33281] (2 of 3) [CRLMB-11169/2026] the statements recorded during the trial demonstrate that the applicant was neither the registered owner nor the proprietor of the subject company. It is further submits that the alleged offences are triable by the Magistrate and that the applicant has been languishing in custody for a period of approximately one year.
3.
Per contra, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the department, assisted by the Officer-in-Charge, Mr. Santosh Kumar Meena, have vehemently opposed the instant bail application and submitted that the present case involves a sophisticated GST scam of the highest order involving fake and fraudulent invoicing.
It is highlighted that while the initial revenue loss estimated at the inception of investigation was approximately Rs. 25 Crores, the ongoing investigation has revealed a massive tax evasion touching approximately Rs. 120 Crores. The Officer-in-Charge submitted that the fraud was taken place online through the creation of numerous fictitious firms, forged documents, and bogus proof of business premises, and therefore, the contention that the applicant was not the registered owner is wholly immaterial, as the applicant acted as a key operative in fabricating the entire network of dummy entities.
4.
Having heard the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, upon an assiduous scanning of the material available on record, and considering the magnitude of the economic offence involving alleged tax evasion to the tune of Rs.
120 Crores through a fraudulent online mechanism; and taking note of the ongoing nature of the investigation, this Court is not inclined to grant the concession of bail to the applicant.
[2026:RJ-JP:33281] (3 of 3) [CRLMB-11169/2026] 5.
Additionally, considering that the vast public revenue is involved in the matter at hand and acknowledging that under the statutory framework of the CGST Act, 2017, more particularly Section 73, extended timelines for assessment and show-cause notices exist, this Court deems it appropriate to issue the following directions:
(i) The Additional Director General (ADG), DGGI, is directed to take immediate, appropriate statutory steps to safeguard the interest of public revenue, including invoking the provisions of provisional attachment of properties under the CGST Act, 2017, if not already done.
(ii) The investigating agency/DGGI is further directed to take necessary corroborative steps by referring the matter and coordinating with the authorities under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 for financial investigation.
6.
Accordingly, looking to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the gravity of the financial fraud, and the ongoing investigation, but without commenting on the merits/demerits of the case, the instant bail application filed under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 stands dismissed, at this stage.
(SAMEER JAIN),J 229/JBI