The Allahabad High Court has rejected the anticipatory bail of Anshul Goyal accused of GST fraud of crore rupees.
A Single Bench of Justice Samit Gopal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc anticipatory bail application filed by Anshul Goyal.
The anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicant Anshul Goyal with the following prayers:-
“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the Court may graciously be pleased to allow the application and grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C, Police Station Sector-20 Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar, on such conditions as may be imposed by the Court; and/or may further be pleased to grant protection to the applicant, either, by way of interim order of anticipatory bail till the disposal of the application; and/or any other suitable order which this may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss.”
The case started on a first information report lodged on 04.05.2023 by Saurabh Dwivedi the Editor of The Lallantop an Internet News Portal and India Today Hindi Magazine addressed to the Commissioner of Police, Noida, Commissionerate Noida, Uttar Pradesh alleging therein that he has come across two GST registrations obtained in the State of Punjab and Maharashtra respectively w.e.f 20.03.2023. They have been applied on his PAN and bear his name Saurabh Dwivedi as the legal name of the business entity. The details of both the registrations as available on the GST portal which were enclosed with the complaint.
The said registrations have not been obtained with his permission and he is totally unaware of the person who applied for the registrations and whose contact details are updated for the registration. The said two registrations are already authenticated for Aadhaar verification whereas as on date no e-mail ID and mobile number is linked with his Aadhaar.
He has further learnt that some registration has been applied in the Union Territory of Delhi, however, the same got rejected by the GST authorities.
The acknowledgement number generated after filing of an application for registration. He requests that a complaint be registered under relevant sections.
Counsel for the applicant argued the following:-
(1) The applicant is not named in the first information report.
(ii) Secret informer disclosed the participation of Deepak Murjani and Yasin Shaikh in the matter.
(iii) Ashwini Pandey and Yasin Shaikh were arrested who gave their confessional statements to the police disclosing the names of Deepak Murjani, Smt. Vineeta Murjani wife of Deepak Murjani, Akash Saini and Atul Sengar.
(iv) The said four persons were arrested and cash Rs 12,66,000/-, 04 laptops, 30 mobile phones, 50 Aadhar and Pan cards, 60 SIM cards and 03 cars of high value were recovered.
(v) The said persons gave their confessional statements to the police disclosing the names of Anchit Goyal, Pradeep Goyal, Archit Goyal, Mayur @ Mani Nagpal, Charu Nagpal and Rohit Nagpal.
(vi) Second confessional statement was recorded in which names of Rajeev Maheshwari, Rajeev Gupta, Gaurav Singhal and Gurmeet Singh Batra were disclosed.
(vii) Gaurav Singhal and Gurmeet Singh Batra were arrested and their confessional statements were recorded in which for the first time the names of 17 persons were disclosed as accused in which one name was disclosed by them as Anshul.
(viii) It is submitted that description of the said person named Anshul is vague as no parentage and address has been disclosed by them.
(ix) Subsequently the police vide CD No 41 dated 20.07.2023 mentions the father’s name of the applicant and his address and states of the applicant being an accused in the matter.
(x) The applicant is a hard-working individual running a cooperative society by the name of Sirsa Court Colony Janta Co-operative Labor and Construction Society Limited wherein he has been its member since the year 2013 and has been carrying on construction projects in Sirsa, paragraph 46 of the affidavit has been placed.
(xi) The applicant is not the beneficiary of the said forged registrations in any manner.
Per contra, Additional Advocate General for the State has submitted the following:-
(i) While placing paragraph 5 & 6 of the counter affidavit dated 12.02.2024 it is argued that the court concerned has issued non- bailable warrant against the applicant vide order dated 10.08.2023, the house of the applicant was raided where he was not found, he is absconding till date and not co-operating in the investigation.
(ii) A Special Investigation Team (S.I.T) has been constituted for investigation of the present case since it is relating to a nationwide cheating and forgery.
(iii) The registration of forged GST firms have been done to avail Input Tax Credit in a forged manner which has caused huge monitory loss to the State Exchequer.
(iv) Co-accused Gaurav Singhal has stated about the work of syndicate and specifically states that the persons involved in it are instrumental in making forged IDs using SIM cards from which fake GST firms are registered and forged billings are shown from the said firms which which they earn money illegally.
(v) While placing paragraph 12 & 15 of the counter affidavit it is submitted that the investigation till date has shown that there is a gang in which several persons are involved in this nexus and have together claimed Input Tax Credit of Rs 26,452,895,600/- (Rupees Two Thousand Six Hundred Forty Five Crore Twenty Eight Lakh Ninety Five Thousand and Six Hundred) which has caused a loss to the revenue to the said extent.
(vi) The DGGI has written a letter to the S.I.T/ Investigating Officer mentioning that on date fraudulent Input Tax Credit in excess of Rs 4000 crores has been detected.
(vii) The syndicate works with different persons looking after different spheres of its work.
The Court observed that,
After having heard counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the allegation in the first information report is of GST registration of two fake firms using the details of the informant.
Looking to the nature of offence an S.I.T was constituted which is investigating the matter. The participation of some accused surfaced initially on the basis of information received through secret informer. Subsequently the names of accused involved in the said work started to be disclosed by accused persons whose complicity surfaced and were arrested.
It then transpired that this activity is PAN India scam. The Input Tax Credit was availed by the accused persons on forged and fictitious papers by registering bogus firms and without any business activity. The embezzlement till date as discovered in the on going investigation and also as reported by the DGGI Unit, Ghaziabad of the GST department shows loss of money of huge magnitude.
The incident is an economic offence. The argument although of the Additional Advocate General is of not entertaining the anticipatory bail of the applicant on the count that non-bailable warrant has been issued against him on 10.08.2023 for which paragraphs 5 & 6 of the counter affidavit have been placed but the facts which transpires in the matter are that the first information report was lodged on 04.05.2023 against unknown persons, the name of the applicant surfaced in the matter on 20.07.2023 in CD No 41, the non-bailable warrant was issued on 10.08.2023 and the anticipatory bail of the applicant was rejected by the Sessions Judge concerned on 06.10.2023 and as such the non-bailable warrant was issued just after 20 days of his name surfacing in the matter and as such ignoring the question of issuance of non-bailable warrant against the applicant during investigation, as of now, the Court has considered the matter on its own merit.
“Looking to the nature of the case, the gravity of offence, the fact that the matter relates to an economic offence, the law laid down by the Apex Court in such matters, the magnitude of offence, the modus as adopted to swindle money from the Government exchequer and the fact that custodial interrogation may be required for further investigation in the matter which is a well organised crime to go to its root and thus the Court does not find it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail”, the Court further observed while rejecting the bail application.