Gaurav Babu Jain vs. State Of Haryana And Another

Held

The Court did not decide the merits of the bail application in CRM-M-48645-2025. Instead, the Court granted the petitioner's request for an adjournment to allow their counsel to prepare and present arguments. The matter was adjourned to 25.09.2025 for further hearing. The Court also noted that the petition CRM-M-48298-2025 was dismissed as withdrawn, as the petitioner's earlier counsel had endorsed no-objection. No findings were made on the allegations under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017, nor was any relief granted or denied on the bail plea itself during this hearing.

Facts

The petitioner, Gaurav Babu Jain, has filed a petition for grant of bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023. The petitioner is an accused in complaint No.COMA/201/2025, dated 13.06.2025, filed by the Central Goods & Service Tax department. The complaint alleges offences under Clause (i) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, specifically referring to offences detailed in Clause (b), (c), and (i) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel sought an adjournment to present arguments, and the matter was adjourned. Separately, another petition, CRM-M-48298-2025, filed by the same petitioner, was dismissed as withdrawn.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to grant of bail under Section 483 BNSS, 2023, considering the alleged offences under Section 132(1)(b), (c), and (i) of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner's counsel sought an adjournment to present arguments regarding the bail application. No specific arguments were recorded in the judgment for the petitioner on the merits of the bail plea. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any arguments presented by the State of Haryana or the respondent revenue authority.