Bail Granted in GST Evasion Case Despite Alleged ₹9.54 Crore Evasion

Case Details

• Case Title: Kishor Kumar Moolani v. State of Rajasthan

• Court: High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur

• Petition No.: S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7338/2025

• Date of Judgement: 18 June 2025

• Relevant Sections:

  • Section 132(1)(c), 132(1)(i), 132(5) of Rajasthan GST Act, 2017

  • Section 483, BNSS, 2023

• Category of Dispute: Bail in GST Offence (Alleged Bogus Supply & Tax Evasion)

Facts of the Case (Para 2–5)

• The petitioner was arrested in connection with alleged bogus supply and tax evasion of ₹9.54 crore under the RGST Act.

• He has been in custody since 03.04.2025, and the charge-sheet was filed on 30.05.2025.

• No prior criminal antecedents exist. Maximum punishment is five years.

• Petitioner relied on Vineet Jain v. Union of India (Cr.A. 2269/2025) and other SC precedents where bail was granted in similar GST cases.

• State opposed bail citing the high quantum of tax evasion.

Question in Consideration (Para 6–7)

• Whether the petitioner should be granted bail in a GST offence involving alleged bogus supply and tax evasion of ₹9.54 crore, considering the custody period, nature of evidence, and precedents.

Observation of Court (Para 7)

• Evidence is mostly documentary and electronic, with official witnesses.

• No risk of tampering, intimidation, or influencing witnesses.

• Petitioner already spent over 2.5 months in custody; trial will take time.

• Maximum punishment is five years, which does not justify continued custody in such circumstances.

• Relied on Vineet Jain, Vishal Agarwal, and Ashutosh Garg precedents.

Judgement of the Court (Para 8)

• Bail application allowed.

• Petitioner to furnish a bond of ₹5,00,000 with two sureties.

• Conditions imposed:

  • Cannot leave country without permission.

  • Must attend trial hearings.

  • Must not tamper with evidence, threaten or influence witnesses.

  • Bail liable to cancellation if conditions are breached.

Between Fine Lines

This ruling clarifies that:

1. In GST offences based on documentary evidence, prolonged custody is unjustified.

2. Bail should normally be granted unless extraordinary circumstances exist.

3. Mere high quantum of alleged evasion is not enough to deny bail.

4. Precedents of SC emphasize liberal bail in tax cases with limited punishment.

5. Court balanced liberty with strict bail conditions to secure trial attendance.

Summary of Referred Cases

Disclaimer – “The above summary is for academic purpose only; not formal legal opinion. Seek professional opinion before application. Author or publisher or website shall not be responsible for any usage in any form.”