JUDGMENT

Rajeev Singh, J.

Heard Sri Amrendra Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant, Sri V.K. Shahi, Additional Advocate General assisted by Sri Rao Narendra Singh, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.738 of 2020, under Sections 419 , 420, 467, 468, 471, 506 and 120-B I.P.C. and Section 66 I.T. Act, Police Station -S.G.P.G.I., District - Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. It is further submitted that the applicant is a young lawyer associated with the informant of the present case, who is also a practising lawyer, sent the eight firms to the applicant for providing legal aid and G.S.T. Thereafter, on his advice, services of one Sanjay Yadav was taken, who misused the user I.D. and password of the applicant and raised fabricated input tax credit. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that detail investigation was conducted by the Investigating Officer, but the only evidence found is of payment of Rs.1,12,000/- in the account of wife of the applicant by co-accused Sanjay Yadav, which is discussed in Parcha no.44. It is vehemently submits that except the aforesaid transaction, there is no evidence that applicant obtained any monitory benefit from the firms as well as in false tax claim. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, statement of main accused, Sanjay Yadav was recorded by the Investigating Officer, in which, he categorically stated that he was a Data Entry Operator and he was actively associated with one Chartered Accountant, namely, Pradeep Kumar and he had done all alleged mischief related to the input tax credit along with said Pradeep Kumar. The applicant was also implicated in four cases, out of which, in two cases, he is on regular bail, in one case he is on anticipatory bail, and in one case final report has been submitted. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that charge sheet has already been filed and there is no possibility of tampering of any evidence, the trial is also not going on. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that co-accused, Sanjay Yadav has already been granted bail by the court below. In such circumstances and in particular the fact that there is no documentary evidence which proves the prosecution story against the applicant, the applicant who is in jail since 20.9.2022, is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

4. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently oppose the prayer for grant of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant informs that informant has moved bail cancellation application in relation to the co-accused Sanjay Yadav, which is still pending.

6. Sri V.K. Shahi, learned A.A.G. on the basis of written instructions dated 24.4.2023 of Mr. Devendra Singh, Joint Commissioner, G.S.T. Head Quarter, Lucknow, submits that there is a huge tax evasion of Rs. 601.26 Crore by way of making false claim of input tax credit in 455 companies, all over the country, out of which, 49 firms were found in U.P., in which Rs. 182 Crore of false input tax credit is found and only 66 lakh rupees has been recovered till today.

7. The letter dated 28.4.2023 of Mr. Devendra Singh, Joint Commissioner, G.S.T. Headquarter, Lucknow is taken on record.

For ready refer