The Delhi High Court has denied anticipatory bail to a suspect in a case involving fraudulent GST registrations using stolen PAN and Aadhaar credentials. According to the court's judgment, the case arose from a complaint by a woman who discovered on April 9, 2024 that two GST firms were linked to her PAN Card despite never applying for GST registration or having any knowledge of the businesses. The complainant alleged that her PAN Card had been misused to fraudulently obtain GST registrations and conduct illicit financial activities in her name. The court noted that the investigation was still continuing to analyze the extent of the alleged fraud and emphasized that the nature of the allegations was vital in determining whether pre-arrest protection should be granted.
The investigation revealed a sophisticated fraud operation involving multiple individuals and technology. As reported by the court, the Investigating Officer visited the alleged operational locations but found no such firms existed. A subsequent technical investigation traced the mobile phone number used for obtaining OTPs for filing GST returns, and the investigation found that the bank account linked with one GST number was fake. The court noted that the investigation led to discovery of an email ID configured with a mobile phone number registered in the name of Raj Kumar, whose email ID was also found linked with another email ID and used as a recovery email ID. According to the prosecution case, Raj Kumar was allegedly involved in generating GST numbers of fake entities and supplying them to co-accused Aman Bisht, who was also alleged to have generated fake invoices and e-way bills using those GST numbers.
The Delhi High Court concluded that the case was not fit for grant of anticipatory bail based on several factors. The court particularly noted the detailed technical investigation conducted by the Investigating Officer and described the status report dated May 25, 2026 as elaborating upon the use of information technology tools to identify the alleged fraudsters. The court observed that such scientific investigation deserved appreciation and noted that the investigation concerning the applicant was still continuing. The court held that granting anticipatory bail would be contrary to judicially sanctified parameters and would send wrong signals to society at large, given the nature of the allegations and the applicant's involvement in three other FIRs involving financial frauds, including one case under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
The court emphasized that the investigation concerning the applicant was still continuing in order to analyze the expanse of the alleged fraud. According to the court's judgment, the Investigating Officer's requirement for custodial interrogation was not unjustified given the nature of the investigation. The court noted that the alleged filing of fake GST returns by misusing PAN Cards and other credentials of innocent persons had extremely serious consequences, both for persons whose particulars were allegedly hacked and for the economy of the country. The matter has been listed for September 8 in the ongoing proceedings, while the investigation continues to examine the scope of the fraudulent activities.
In a separate development, the Delhi High Court has set aside a GST Show Cause Notice and Order where portal-only uploading was not treated as sufficient service. The petitioner had sought issuance of a writ to quash the Show Cause Notice dated November 20, 2024 and Order dated February 7, 2025 under Section 73 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The court considered the Division Bench judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Luxmi Traders v. Union Territory of Chandigarh and Others (2026) 44 CENTAX 371 (P&H), which examined service of notices through the GST common portal. The court held that mere uploading of a notice, without acknowledgement of receipt or filing of a reply, could not by itself be treated as sufficient service. The petitioner has been directed to appear before the concerned GST Officer on August 19, 2026 at 11:00 A.M. for filing its reply to the impugned Show Cause Notice.
