The Jharkhand High Court has granted bail to an accused in a case involving the alleged fraudulent claim and utilisation of Input Tax Credit (ITC) amounting to ₹15.83 crore under the Goods and Services Tax (GST), observing that the accused had remained in custody for over four months.
The applicant, Harshvardhan, approached the High Court and asked for bail as per the complaint instituted by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI).
Under the allegations, the applicant, acting as the husband and power-of-attorney holder of the proprietor of M/s Raghupati Steel Traders, had fraudulently claimed and used bogus GST Input Tax Credit of ₹15.83 crore, which draws penal consequences u/s 132 of the CGST Act.
For offences punishable under Sections 132(1)(c), 132(1)(f), 132(1)(l), and 132(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, the case was registered.
Adv. Nitin Kr. Pasari, the applicant’s representative, requested bail, following the Supreme Court’s decision in Ratnambar Kaushik v. Union of India. Bail was granted in the GST evasion case because the accused had been detained for over four months, and the evidence was largely documentary.
Drawing a comparison, the counsel asserted that the petitioner, who has been in court detention for more than four months following February 11, 2026, warrants bail as well.
Meanwhile, the Directorate General of GST Intelligence countered the bail application and sought continued detention of the accused.
Considering the period of custody already undergone by the accused, Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary asked for the release of the petitioner on furnishing a bail bond of ₹5 lakh along with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Judge, Economic Offences, Jamshedpur.
The HC granted relief and imposed conditions, including a direction that the petitioner should cooperate with the trial, furnish his mobile number and Aadhaar card before the trial court, and undertake not to change his mobile number during the pendency of the proceedings.
The court said that the applicant shall not annoy, influence, or disturb any witness linked with the case.
| Case Title | Shri Harshvardhan vs The Union of India |
| Case | B.A. No. 3515 of 2026 |
| For Petitioner | Mr. Nitin Kr. Pasari, Advocate |
| For Respondent | Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate |
| Jharkhand High Court | Read Order |
