Judgment
1
CGHC010282822026
2026:CGHC:38396
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 6868 of 2026 Jaideep Singh Chandel S/o Dalbahadur Singh Chandel Aged About 32 Years Director M/s Meridian Steels And Infra Private Limited, R/o 8, Near Gajraha School, Village - Gajraha, Post Chandwahi, Tehsil - Bahari, Gajraha, Distt. Sidhi, Madhya Pradesh 486661
... Applicant versus Superintendent (Preventive) Office Of The Principal Commissioner, Central G S T And Central Excise, G S T Bhawan, Dhamtari Road, Tikrapara, Raipur Chhattisgarh 492001
... Non-Applicant For Applicant :
Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate with Shri Siddharth Dubey & Shri Anmol Varma, Advocates.
For Non-Applicant :
Shri Manish Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel.
Hon'ble Shri
Ramesh Sinha
, Chief Justice
Order on Board 31/08/2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Complaint Case No./Crime No.163/PREV/GST/2025-26, PS/Department : Office of the Principal Commissioner, Central KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Digitally signed by KRISHNA KUMAR BARVE Date:
2026.09.01 11:25:18 +0530
2 GST, District Raipur for offence punishable under Section 132 (1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the Accused/Applicant is the Director of the Firm MERIDIAN STEELS AND INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED having its registered office at Shop No-228, Karsan Bhai, Chamber, Timber Market, Fafadih, Raipur, Chattisgarh and is also the authorised signatory of the said firm for the purpose of GST. As per the prosecution story, the Central GST Department has received secret/confidential information that the Applicant / Accused (Director of the Firm M/S Meridian Steels and Infra Pvt Ltd.) were availing ITC benefits without supplying the actual goods and were causing loss to government revenue. Based on this information, the GST Department conducted search at the official business address of M/s Meridian Steels & Infra Pvt Ltd on 28.11.2025, and the entire process was recorded in the panchnama. During the panchnama proceedings, some incriminating documents related to the business were also seized. Statement of Mr.
Jaideep Singh Chandel/Applicant was recorded by under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017. Further case of prosecution is that, on minute examination of GSTR-2B of M/s Meridian Steels & Infra Pvt. Ltd., it was found that M/s Meridian Steels & Infra Pvt. Ltd. had availed ITC illegally to the tune of ₹15,14,84,181/- in the financial year 2025-26 on the basis of
3 bills issued by non- existent fake firms without actually supplying any goods. Also M/s Meridian Steels & Infra Pvt. Ltd.
has also availed additional (excess) ITC of ₹1,98,39,986/-in GSTR-3B as compared to GSTR-2B during the financial year 2025-26 and hence a total of Rs.17,13,24,167/- has been availed from unauthorized Input Tax Credit. Further case of the prosecution is that on close scrutiny of the said Firm it has also been found that M/s Meridian Steels & Infra Pvt. Ltd. has availed ITC on the basis of bogus/fake bills issued by fake/non- existential firms. The GST registration of these firms has been cancelled by the GST Department under Section 29, and under Rule 21 of the CGST Act 2017. The GST Department has also substantiated the findings by checking the E-way bills and movement of the vehicles. Statement of the accused/applicant was recorded on 9.6.2026 and it is alleged that the accused/applicant has admitted the commission of offence of availing ITC through fake bills to the tune of Rs.17,13,24,167/-.
The applicant was arrested on the said date. Hence the bail application.
3. It has been argued by learned Senior counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the crime. The allegations levelled against the applicant arise out of certain business transactions allegedly undertaken during the Financial Year 2025-26 of M/s Meridian Steels and Infra
4 Private Limited and are based upon disputed questions of fact which are yet to be established in accordance with law. The applicant has been implicated during the course of investigation without there being any material conclusively establishing his involvement in the alleged offence. No requisites to establish any offence under Section 132(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 are established even prima facie against the Accused/ Applicant.
The quantum and nature of punishment under the GST Act, 2017 is based upon the quantum of tax involved. The Prosecution has not even determined the quantum, which can only be decided after assessment (which is even appealable).
The whole allegation is based only upon few unknown documents seized by the Prosecution and the statement given by the Applicant/Accused under section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 and no proper assessment has been done yet. Custody is unwarranted in documentary investigations, custodial interrogation serves no purpose and would amount to punitive detention. The Hon'ble Supreme Court very recently in the case of Vineet Jain v. Union of India 2025 {LiveLaw (SC) 513} has held that the offence under Section 132 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 stipulate a maximum punishment of five (5) years with a fine and that these cases the Accused shall be is unwarranted in documentary granted the benefit of bail in normal course before the Trial Court itself. All the offences under the CGST
5 Act, 2017 are compoundable under Section 138 and hence, the object and purpose of the CGST Act, 2017 is not penal in nature, but it is economic for the purpose of legislation being to recover any amount, that may be due to the Government exchequer. The applicant does not have any criminal antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 9.6.2026. Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State/non-applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the complaint has been filed against the applicant.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that the complaint has already been submitted against the applicant, the applicant does not have any criminal antecedents, which is mentioned in the bail application, the applicant is in jail since 9.6.2026, and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the present case. Accordingly, the Application is allowed.
7.
If the applicant, Jaideep Singh Chandel, furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one solvent local surety to the satisfaction of the concerned Court, he be released on bail involved in Complaint Case No./Crime
6 No.163/PREV/GST/2025-26, PS/Department : Office of the Principal Commissioner, Central GST, District Raipur for offence punishable under Section 132 (1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Order shall be in force till disposal of the case.
-
Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice Barve