High Court of Gujarat
SHRI BHAVESH KUMAR SAHNI S/O. SHRI RAJ KUMAR SAHNIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED @ ADMISSION STAGE
- Bench
- ILESH VORA
Holding
The court held that, given the completed investigation, absence of necessity for further detention, and the moderate maximum sentence, the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the BNSS.
Summary
The High Court of Gujarat considered an application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, filed by Raman Kantpal, a director of M/s. WLTPE, who was alleged to have orchestrated a large-scale GST fraud involving fake invoices and wrongful input tax credit claims amounting to Rs.351.19 crore. The prosecution argued that the offence was an economic crime and the applicant was the mastermind, warranting continued detention. The defence contended that the investigation was complete, the applicant had been in custody since April 2026, and further detention served no purpose, especially given the maximum five‑year sentence. The court observed that the investigation was concluded, there was no risk of tampering with evidence, and the statutory maximum penalty was moderate, thus finding no justification for continued custody. Consequently, the court granted regular bail on a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000 with specified conditions, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the underlying fraud case.
Issues considered
- Whether the applicant is eligible for regular bail under Section 483 BNSS despite the alleged economic offence under the CGST Act.
- Whether the completion of investigation and lack of necessity for further detention justify granting bail.
- Whether the nature of the alleged offence and the applicant's alleged role as mastermind preclude the exercise of judicial discretion to grant bail.
Legislation cited
- Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017s. 132(6), s. 134, s. 31(c), s. 32(1)(b), s. 332(1)(i), s. 332(5)
Subjects
regular bailSection 483 BNSSGST fraudeconomic offenceCGST Actcorporate fraudinvestigation completedbail conditions
Judgment
R/CR.MA/15066/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUCCESSIVE REGULAR BAIL -
AFTER CHARGESHEET) NO. 15066 of 2026
==========================================================
SHRI BHAVESH KUMAR SAHNI S/O. SHRI RAJ KUMAR SAHNI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS GM JOSHI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR SAMIR B GOGDA(11306)
for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PRANAV DHAGAT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
TIRTH NAYAK(8563) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 17/07/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr.G.M. Joshi assisted by
Mr.Samir Gogda, learned advocate, and learned Standing Council
Mr.Tirth Nayak, and learned APP Mr.Pranav Dhagat for the respective
parties.
2. Prayer in this application filed under Section 483 of the
Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is for grant of regular bail to
the applicant Raman Kantpal, arising out of complaint case no.173676
of 2026, dated 27.05.2026, titled as Senior Intelligent Officer, GST
Intelligent, Ahmedabad Zonal Unit Vs. Bhavik Sahani, Director of
M/s.WLTPE (M/s.Yoke Payment India Private Limited) and Shri
Ramakant Pal, Director of the same company, filed under Section
32(1)(b) and Section 31(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax,
2017, read with Section 332(1)(i) and Section 332(5) of the Central
Goods and Services Tax, 2017 read with Section 210 of the BNSS,
Page 1 of 5
R/CR.MA/15066/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
2023, read with Section 134 and 132(6) of CGST Act, 2017.
3. Brief facts giving rise to file present application are as under:
3.1 The applicant is the Director of the M/s. WLTPE, having
registered office at Delhi and company is engaged in
providing E-Top up services for which, GST registration was
provided under HSN.
3.2 It is alleged that the company and its Director were
engaged in the systematic and well orchestrated fraud involving
by issuance of fake invoices without any underline supply of e-
top up services to pass on fraudulent input tax credit to 18
beneficiary companies.
3.3 Accordingly, after due approval of the competent
authority, the searches were conducted and on summons, the
statement of the applicant and others were recorded. It was
revealed that the applicant and other Directors have fraudulently
issued fake invoice for taxable value of Rs.351.19 crores (ITC
Rs.63.21 crores) to 18 beneficiary companies without actual
underline supply of e-top up services. It was further revealed that
the applicant executed and organized systemic tax evasion
scheme, causing substantial loss to the government revenue,
whereby committed an offences under the provisions of the
CGST Act 2017 and other offences as referred above.
Page 2 of 5
R/CR.MA/15066/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
4. Mr.G.M. Joshi, learned Senior Advocate has submitted that since
April-2026, the applicant is in jail. The authority has seized the
substantial cash amount along with the all the gadgets as well as the e-
ledger and therefore, the investigation is over and complaint is filed and
further custody would not serve any purpose and having regard to the
contempt of punishment and remote possibility of early disposal of the
case, the applicant may be enlarged on bail imposing appropriate
conditions.
5. Opposing the prayer of the bail, learned Standing Council
Mr.Tirth Nayak, reiterating the contents of the affidavit in reply, it is
contended that there is a prima facie case for commission of the offence
by the applicant herein and the offence being an economical offence and
the applicant being a mastermind of the offence and considering the
larger public interest, no case is made out for exercising judicial
discretion and the application may be dismissed.
6. In the facts of the present case, during the investigation, the
department was secured some financial stake and also have seized the
computer gadgets and e-ledger of the company. Since April-2026, the
applicant is in jail and there are no chances of early disposal of the
criminal case filed by the department. The maximum sentence as
provided in the alleged offence is five years. The case of department
rests on the documentary evidence. There is no need for further
detention of the applicant. In such circumstances, I am of the considered
opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Page 3 of 5
R/CR.MA/15066/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
7. Hence, the bail application is allowed and the applicant is
ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the complaint
case no.173676 of 2026, dated 27.05.2026 (File No.DGGI/INV/FUP/
40/2026-Gr.A, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Ahmedabad, on executing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees
One Lakh only), with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction
of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall:
No. Conditions
(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;
(b) not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the
prosecution;
(c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a
week;
(d) not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions
Judge concerned;
(e) furnish latest address of residence to the Investigating
Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of
the bond and shall not change the residence without
prior permission of the trial Court;
(f) shall cooperate in trial without seeking unnecessary
adjournments;
8. The authorities shall release the applicant if he is not required in
connection with the any other offence. If breach of any above
Page 4 of 5
R/CR.MA/15066/2026 ORDER DATED: 17/07/2026
condition is committed, the Court concerned shall take appropriate
action or issue warrant against the applicant. The bail bond to be
executed before the learned trial Court having jurisdiction to try the
case. It will be open for the sessions judge concerned to delete, modify
and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law.
Nothing stated hereinabove, shall tantamount to the expression of any
opinion on the merits of this case. Direct Service is permitted.
(ILESH J. VORA,J)
Rakesh
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: RAKESH MAHESHKUMAR KOSHTI(HC00950), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 17/07/2026 17:38:44
Page 5 of 5
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "regular bail"Sign in to search