Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Bail To CA Assistant In CGST Fraud Case

The Punjab & Haryana High Court on 11 May granted regular bail to a chartered accountant’s assistant accused in a GST fraud case registered under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. A Bench of Justice H.S. Grewal observed that continued incarceration was not justified when the alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate and carry a maximum punishment of five years. The Court pointed out that

“Bail is the rule and jail is the exception, particularly where the offences are triable by a Magistrate and the accused has already undergone substantial custody.”

The petitioner, Ravi Kumar, a law graduate working as an assistant in a Chartered Accountant’s office, was arrested in connection with Complaint No. COMA/14/2016 dated January 16, 2026, registered by CGST authorities at Gurugram under Section 132(1)(b), (c) and (i) of the CGST Act.

The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was involved in facilitating a fraudulent tax arrangement resulting in violation of GST provisions. Seeking regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the petitioner argued that he had already spent nearly six months in custody and that the investigation against him stood completed.

It was further submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the alleged offences are triable by a Magistrate and the maximum prescribed sentence is five years. Therefore, prolonged pre-trial detention would serve no useful purpose.

The High Court accepted the submissions and observed that continued custody pending trial was not warranted in the facts of the case. The court highlighted a point that

“Considering the nature of allegations, the period of custody already undergone and the fact that the matter is triable by a Magistrate, further detention of the petitioner is not required.”

While allowing the petition, the Court directed release of the petitioner on regular bail subject to furnishing requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court or Duty Magistrate concerned.

The Court also clarified that in case the petitioner is found indulging in any other criminal activity while on bail, the State would be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail in accordance with law.

Thus, the petition was allowed, and regular bail was granted to the petitioner.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below