Allowed

Sri Surajit Barman v. the State of Assam

Gauhati HC13 Sept 2026Bail Appln./2375/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed bail to the petitioner, Surajit Barman, arrested on charges of fraudulently availing input tax credit under the BNS 2023 and Assam GST Act 2017, imposing a bond and conditions including prohibition from using the GST portal.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with one local surety of the like amount, subject to specific Conditions.

Sri Surajit Barman Vs the State of Assam — Corruption | Gauhati HC (2026)

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010175632026

2026:GAU-AS:13522

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : Bail Appln./2375/2026

¶6

SRI SURAJIT BARMAN

¶7

S/O SATYA BARMAN, R/O VILLAGE ALAGJAR, PO AND PS BARAMA DIST BAKSA, ASSAM PIN 781346

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY, THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM.

¶10

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, W.H. DEVI,MR. G BORBHUIYA,MR. N ALI,MR G G GOGOI,MR A HOSSAIN,MRS. K H CHOUDHURY

¶11

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM,

¶12

BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

¶13

ORDER

¶14

14.09.2026

¶15

1. Heard Mr. J.I. Borbhuiya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent state.

¶16

2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with STF

¶17

Page No.# 2/4

¶18

P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 registered under Sections 61(2), 318(3), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the BNS, 2023.

¶19

3. The FIR in connection with which the petitioner was arrested and has been in custody for the last 44 days was lodged on 10.07.2026 by the Superintendent of State Tax stating inter alia that an accused taxpayer, namely, Hrishikesh Kalita in connivance with other accused persons, including the petitioner had fraudulently availed input tax credit amounting to Rs. 12,10,76,251.70/- during the financial year 2025–2026 from four non-existent/fictitious firms without any actual supply or receipt of goods and services, thereby causing substantial loss to the Government exchequer in violation of the provisions of Section 16(2) of the Assam GST Act, 2017.

¶20

4. It was further alleged in the FIR that a fake ITC racket was being operated by one Shubhajit Bhattacharjee from Kolkata and that the petitioner was involved in the creation and management of GST registrations in Assam for the purpose of generating fake invoices.

¶21

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not registered under the GST regime and does not have access to the GST portal. As such, according to the learned counsel the allegation against the petitioner of generating fake invoices does not arise. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not involved in the alleged offence and that false allegations have been levelled against him.

¶22

6. Mr. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General submits that it has been specifically stated in the statements of the co-accused as well as other

¶23

Page No.# 3/4

¶24

witnesses that the petitioner was involved in the organized fraudulent ITC network and had played an active role in generating fake invoices to facilitate the availment of input tax credit by the parties concerned including the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner had facilitated the use of his GST-registered concerns and had obtained access to the GST portal, thereby negating the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶25

7. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, more so in view of the fact that the petitioner has been in custody for the last 44 days and that his statement has also been recorded, this Court deems it fit and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with one local surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) subject to the following conditions:

¶26

(i) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for and shall cooperate with the investigation. He shall furnish all information and produce such relevant documents as may be required by the Investigating Officer and which are in his possession or within his knowledge;

¶27

(ii) The petitioner shall not hamper the investigation or tamper with the evidence of the case and shall not, directly or indirectly, influence, threaten or induce any witness;

¶28

(iii) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the prior permission of the Investigating Officer;

¶29

(iv) The petitioner shall not use the GST portal for generating,

¶30

Page No.# 4/4

¶31

uploading, filing or processing any document, invoice, return or other transaction relating to GST during the pendency of the trial;

¶32

(v) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each date fixed and shall cooperate with the proceedings; and

¶33

(vi) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, interfere with the fair conduct of the trial or attempt to influence, threaten or induce any witness or tamper with any evidence.

¶34

8. Accordingly, this Bail Application is disposed of.

¶35

JUDGE

¶36

Comparing Assistant

Sri Surajit Barman v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Surajit Barman v. the State of Assam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases