Surajit Barman Vs State of Assam (Gauhati High Court)
Summary: Gauhati High Court granted bail to Surajit Barman, who had remained in custody for 44 days in connection with STF P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 registered under Sections 61(2), 318(3), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the BNS, 2023. The prosecution case arose from an FIR lodged by the Superintendent of State Tax alleging that taxpayer Hrishikesh Kalita, in connivance with other accused persons including the petitioner, had fraudulently availed input tax credit of ₹12,10,76,251.70 during FY 2025–26 from four non-existent/fictitious firms without actual supply or receipt of goods and services, allegedly violating Section 16(2) of the Assam GST Act, 2017.
It was alleged that a fake ITC racket was operated from Kolkata and that the petitioner participated in creation and management of GST registrations for generating fake invoices. The petitioner contended that he was not GST-registered, lacked access to the GST portal and was falsely implicated. The State relied on statements of co-accused and witnesses alleging his active involvement and access to GST-registered concerns. Considering that the petitioner had already undergone 44 days of custody and his statement had been recorded, the High Court considered it appropriate to release him on bail on a ₹20,000 bond with one local surety. Bail was made subject to cooperation with investigation, non-interference with witnesses and evidence, restrictions on leaving his residence without permission, regular appearance before the Trial Court, and a specific prohibition against using the GST portal for generating, uploading, filing or processing GST documents, invoices, returns or transactions during pendency of the trial.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GAUHATI HIGH COURT
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.
2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with STF P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 registered under Sections 61(2), 318(3), 336(3), 338 and 340(2) of the BNS, 2023.
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.
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.
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.
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 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
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:
(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;
(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;
(iii) The petitioner shall not leave his place of residence without the prior permission of the Investigating Officer;
(iv) The petitioner shall not use the GST portal for generating, uploading, filing or processing any document, invoice, return or other transaction relating to GST during the pendency of the trial;
(v) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court on each date fixed and shall cooperate with the proceedings; and
(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.
8. Accordingly, this Bail Application is disposed of.
