Facts of the Case

This is CRM-M-5147-2023 (O&M) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, a petition under Section 438 CrPC for anticipatory bail filed by Mandeep @ Monty in connection with FIR No. 277 dated 06.12.2022 registered under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008, at Police Station Gobindgarh Mandi, District Fatehgarh Sahib. This is a fraud/forgery case, not a case adjudicating GST liability. The FIR arose from a letter by the State Excise Officer alleging that fake and forged documents — including photoshopped rent deeds and property-tax receipts, sometimes bearing mismatched applicant photographs — were being used across various wards to obtain bogus GST registrations on the GST portal.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner had made out a case for anticipatory bail given the nature of the allegations regarding fictitious firms set up to defraud the Government.
  2. Whether custodial interrogation of the petitioner was necessary for the investigation.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Sought anticipatory bail contending no custodial interrogation was required and that his role, if any, did not warrant denial of pre-arrest bail.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State relied on affidavits detailing the investigation and the petitioner's specific role, contending that he and his co-accused had set up fictitious firms/companies to cheat the government of crores of rupees, and that recoveries of documents and identification of real beneficiaries required custodial interrogation.
  • Reliance was placed on Supreme Court precedent cautioning against treating the absence of a need for custodial interrogation as, by itself, sufficient ground to grant anticipatory bail.

Court Order / Findings

  • Examining the affidavits filed by the State, the Court found that a prima facie case was established against the petitioner regarding setting up fictitious firms/companies to cheat the government.
  • Recoveries of documents and identification of real beneficiaries were still required, making custodial interrogation of the petitioner necessary.
  • Without commenting on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application was dismissed.

Important Clarification

This order does not decide any GST compliance or registration-cancellation question — the alleged bogus GST-registration racket is the backdrop of a forgery/cheating case, and the ruling turns entirely on anticipatory-bail principles, particularly the necessity of custodial interrogation, not on any interpretation of GST law.

Sections Involved

  • Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
  • Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471, Indian Penal Code, 1860
  • Section 66D, Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008

Decision – In Favour of

In favour of the State — the anticipatory bail application was dismissed, with the Court finding custodial interrogation necessary, though expressly without commenting on the ultimate merits of the case.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Case No.: CRM-M-5147-2023 (O&M)
Neutral Citation: 2023:PHHC:079870
Coram: Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi
Date: 1 June 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.