HARISH WADHWANI vs DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICE TAX INTELLIGENCE/DGGI,

1

CGHC010272322026 2026:CGHC:38401
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCRC No. 6572 of 2026
Harish Wadhwani S/o Shri Roopchand Wadhwani Aged About 44 Years
R/o Villa No. 196, Sapphire Greens, Vidhansabha Road, Raipur,
Chhattisgarh.
... Applicant
versus
Directorate General Of Goods And Service Tax Intelligence/dggi,
Regional Unit, Raipur, Through Abhish Singh Parihar, Senior
Intelligence Officer, Dggi, Zonal Unit, Raipur Chhattisgarh.
... Non-Applicant
For Applicant : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Sr. Advocate with Shri
Siddharth Dubey & Shri Anmol Varma,
Advocates.
For Non-Applicant : Shri Manish Sharma, Sr. Standing Counsel.
Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice
Order on Board
31/08/2026
1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for grant of regular
bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with
Crime No.DGGI/INV/GST/111/2026-Gr-VI, dated 18.1.2025
Digitally
signed by
KRISHNA
KUMAR
BARVE
Date:
2026.09.01
11:17:32
+0530
KRISHNA
KUMAR
BARVE

2
(AD220426004576B), PS/Department : Directorate General of
Goods and Service Tax Intelligence/DGGI, Regional Unit,
Raipur, District Raipur for offence punishable under Section 132
(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that during investigation
conducted by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence
(DGGI), Raipur Zonal Unit, it was allegedly found that the
Accused/Applicant, being Partner of M/s Om Kiran Ispat Udyog
(GSTIN: 22AABFO1161B1Z5), had fraudulently availed and
utilized Input Tax Credit amounting to Rs.6,92,97,453/- without
actual receipt or supply of goods on the strength of invoices
allegedly issued by 12 non-existent/fake firms. It is further
alleged by the prosecution that the Accused/Applicant was the
key person responsible for availing and utilizing the aforesaid
Input Tax Credit and that the said transactions were carried out
through bogus invoices without actual movement or supply of
goods. It is also alleged that the Accused/Applicant failed to
cooperate with the investigation and did not comply with certain
summons issued under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017. the
prosecution further alleges that the Accused/Applicant has
committed an offence punishable under clause (c) of sub-
section (1) of Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017, punishable
under clause (i) of Section 132(1) and covered under Section
132(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, treating the alleged offence as

3
cognizable and non-bailable. The Applicant was issued
summons under Section 70 of the CGST Act, 2017 on various
occasions, including summons dated 18.01.2025, 25.04.2025,
15.05.2025 and 30.09.2025 requiring production of records and
appearance before the investigating authority. The first
summon dated 18.01.2025 was issued by DGGI, Raipur Zonal
Unit in connection with GST enquiry concerning the business
affairs of M/s Om Kiran Ispat Udyog and required the Applicant
to tender oral evidence and produce documents in relation to
the ongoing investigation. The summon dated 25.04.2025
required the Applicant to furnish details and supporting
documents relating to purchases allegedly made from various
supplier firms including M/s Bajrang Ventures, M/s P.P.
Ventures, M/s Balaji Trading, M/s Agastya Enterprises, M/s
Mahamaya Traders and M/s Manish Traders along with
transportation documents, E-Way Bills, bank statements and
other financial records. The summons dated 15.05.2025
pertained specifically to transactions with M/s Unique
Enterprises and required production of purchase invoices,
transportation records, E-Way Bills and proof of payments
made to the said concern. The summons dated 30.09.2025
related to purchases allegedly made from M/s Jambavan
Enterprises, M/s SB Enterprise and M/s Cornerstone Enterprise
and required production of invoices, ledger accounts, banking

4
transactions, transportation documents, goods receipt records
and related materials. The summons primarily required the
Applicant to furnish purchase invoices, GST records,
transportation documents, E-Way Bills, books of accounts, bank
statements, ledger accounts and other documents relating to
the business activities of M/s Om Kiran Ispat Udyog and its
suppliers. Substantial documentary records and information
sought by the department were already available with the
investigating agency and extensive investigation had been
conducted for more than one year prior to the arrest of the
Applicant. The entire prosecution case is founded upon
documentary evidence and alleged transactions reflected in
GST returns, invoices, banking records and other business
documents. Subsequent summons dated 19.02.2026,
09.04.2026, 17.04.2026 and 19.05.2026 were also issued to the
applicant. Hence the bail application.
3.
It has been argued by learned Senior counsel for the applicant
that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in
the crime. No requisites to establish any offence under Section
132(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017 are established even prima
facie against the Accused/ Applicant. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court very recently in the case of Vineet Jain v. Union of India
2025 {LiveLaw (SC) 513} has held that the offence under
Section 132 (1) of the CGST Act, 2017 stipulate a maximum

5
punishment of five (5) years with a fine and in these cases the
Accused shall be granted the benefit of bail in normal course
before the Trial Court itself. All the offences under the CGST
Act, 2017 are compoundable under Section 138 and hence, the
object and purpose of the CGST Act, 2017 is not penal in
nature, but it is economic for the purpose of legislation being to
recover any amount, that may be due to the Government
exchequer. The applicant does not have any criminal
antecedents. The applicant is in jail since 15.6.2026.
Therefore, the applicant may be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the non-
applicant would oppose the bail application and submit that the
complaint has been filed against the applicant.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and
perused the case diary.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the
case, and the fact that the complaint has already been
submitted against the applicant, the applicant does not have
any criminal antecedents, which is mentioned in the bail
application, the applicant is in jail since 15.6.2026, and
conclusion of trial is likely to take some time, this Court is of the
view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in the
present case. Accordingly, the Application is allowed .
7. If the applicant, Harish Wadhwani , furnishes a personal bond in

6
the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with one solvent surety to the
satisfaction of the concerned Court, he be released on bail
involved in Crime No.DGGI/INV/GST/111/2026-Gr-VI, dated
18.1.2025 (AD220426004576B), PS/Department : Directorate
General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence/DGGI, Regional
Unit, Raipur, District Raipur for offence punishable under
Section 132 (1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017. Order shall be in
force till disposal of the case .
-

Sd/-
(Ramesh Sinha)
Chief Justice
Barve