Allowed¶13

Vinita v. Union of India

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2025BAIL/14120/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail - S.483 BNSS 2023 - C.G.S.T. Act 2017 S.132(1) - fake firms / Input Tax Credit (ITC) fraud - DGGI Ghaziabad Unit, District Meerut - applicant in custody about two years - offence punishable up to five years, triable by Magistrate - charge not framed - 61 prosecution witnesses - parity with co-accused Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil (bail dated 7.8.2024) and Gaurav Singhal (bail dated 29.5.2024) - material witnesses official/Bank staff, no chance of winning over - lady applicant - bail allowed without opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant-Vinita to be released on regular bail in Case No. 22362 of 2023 subject to her furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court; no expression of opinion on the merits. ¶13

Vinita Vs Union of India — GST and Indirect Tax | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant-Vinita is entitled to regular bail during the pendency of trial in Case No. 22362 of 2023 under the C.G.S.T. Act, 2017. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

Since the alleged offences carry a maximum punishment of five years, are triable by a Magistrate, the applicant has been in custody for about two years, and conclusion of the trial is likely to consume considerable time, further detention of the applicant behind bars would not be justified for any useful purpose.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

The applicant is entitled to parity with the similarly situated co-accused Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil, who was released on regular bail vide order dated 7.8.2024.

¶10

Key takeaways

The material witnesses are either official witnesses or officials of the Bank, and at present there does not seem to be any possibility of their being won over.ratio¶10
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed and the applicant-Vinita is to be released on regular bail in the above case crime, subject to furnishing requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Manoj Bajaj, J.) allowed a regular bail application under Section 483 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 filed by Vinita, an accused in Case No. 22362 of 2023 (Police Station Department DGGI, Ghaziabad Unit, District Meerut) under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), 132(1)(f), 132(1)(I) and 132(1)(i) of the C.G.S.T. Act, 2017, arising from alleged creation of fake firms to claim and pass on Input Tax Credit. The applicant, a lady in custody since July 2023 (about two years), faced offences punishable with a maximum of five years and triable by a Magistrate; charge had not been framed and sixty-one prosecution witnesses remained to be examined. Noting parity with the similarly situated co-accused Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil (released on bail on 7.8.2024) and that the material witnesses were official/Bank witnesses with no apparent possibility of being won over, the Court held that further detention would serve no useful purpose and released her on bail on furnishing bail and surety bonds, expressly without expressing any opinion on the merits.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:133576

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14120 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vinita Opposite Party :- Union of India Counsel for Applicant :- Navnath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Parv Agarwal

¶5

Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.

¶6

Applicant- Vinita has filed this application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for grant of regular bail, during the pendency of trial in Case No. 22362 of 2023, under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1) (c), 132(1)(f), 132(1)(I) and 132(1)(i) of C.G.S.T. Act, 2017, Police Station Department DGGI, Ghaziabad Unit, District Meerut. The applicant is in custody since her arrest on 28.07.2023.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that as per the complaint, the accused persons were involved in creations of fake firms to claim benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) and further passed it on the other fake firms and in this commission of crime, coaccused- Gaurav Singhal is stated to be the mastermind. He submits that the complaint is directed against eight accused persons and the concession of regular bail has been extended to Gaurav Singhal and Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil vide orders dated 29.5.2024 and 7.8.2024, respectively. According to the learned counsel, the applicant being lady has been falsely implicated in the case on the ground that she facilitated the commission of crime, and role attributed to her is similar to the role of co- accused Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil, who is on bail. It is further submitted that as per complaint, sixty one prosecution witnesses are to be examined before the trial court, however, till

¶8

date, even charge has not been framed against the accused persons. He prays for grant of regular bail to the applicant during the pendency of the trial.

¶9

Mr. Parv Agarwal, learned counsel for the complainant/Union of India, while opposing the prayer does not dispute this fact that the co- accused of the applicant, namely, Gaurav Singhal and Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil have been extended the concession of regular bail. However, according to him, two co- accused persons, namely Deepak Murjani and Yasin Sheikh are in custody, whereas three other accused persons, namely, Arjit Goyal, Anchit Goyal and Pradeep Goyal are absconding.

¶10

After hearing the learned counsel and considering their submissions, this Court finds that the alleged offences carry a maximum punishment of five years and the applicant has already been in custody for the last two years since her arrest on 19th July, 2023. The offences are triable by Magistrate and the conclusion of trial is likely to consume considerable time, therefore, further detention of the applicant behind the bars would not be justified for any useful purpose. Concededly, the similarly situated coaccused, namely, Gurmeet Singh Batra @ Sahil has been released on regular bail vide order dated 7.8.2024, and further, the material witnesses are either the official witnesses or officials of the Bank, and at present there does not seem to be any possibility of their being won over.

¶11

Thus, considering the above background of the case, the custodial period undergone by the applicant, this Court deems it appropriate to extend the concession of regular bail to the applicant.

¶12

Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the

¶13

merits of the case, the bail application is allowed and it is ordered that the applicant- Vinita be released on regular bail in the above case crime subject to her furnishing the requisite bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court.

¶14

Order Date :- 7.8.2025/Raj

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinita v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinita v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases