IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 19.05.2026 KAMALPREET SINGH ....Petitioner versus STATE(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE)

CHANDIGARH ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present :- Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate with Ms. Vanshika Daaria, Advocate and Ms. Malini Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Sourabh Goel, Sr. Standing Counsel for DGGI with Ms. Deify Jindal, Advocate, Ms. Anju Bansal, Advocate and Ms. Geetika Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J.

CRM-6655-2026 This is an application filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for preponing the date of hearing of the main case from 12.03.2026 to an early date.

Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner submits that he does not press the instant application as it has been rendered infructuous.

As such, the application stands dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. CRM-M-73660-2025

1. Present petition has been filed for grant of regular bail in case No. IINT/COMP/3/2025-GROUP-E O/o ADG-DGGI-ZU-Chandigarh dated 11.09.2025 (Annexure P-1) under Section 132(1) (B) and 132(1) (C) read with Section 132(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 and Section 20 (XV) of the Integrated Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.

2. Succinctly the facts of the case are that the petitioner has been prosecuted by the respondent in a complaint case for the offence under Section 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(C) read with Section 132(5) of CGST Act, 2017 and Section 20(XV) of the IGST Act, 2017. It was alleged that on 11.09.2025 from about 7:20 PM to 10:20 PM, inspection under Section 67(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 was conducted by Investigating Agency in residential premises of applicant and registered addresses of nine firms, being operated upon by the accused. That during the course of investigation, pursuant to the said search, mobile phone VIVO Y28 5G, mobile phone VIVO Y29 5G, Laptop HP, HDD, 16GB Sandisk Pen Drive, 28 GB Sandisk Pen Drive, 32 GB Toshiba Pen Drive, Notepad, Miscellaneous Paper, Kotak Mahindra Bank Chequebook, Bhushan Computer Kanda, Notepad, Bank RTGS/NEFT Application Form, Hardik Dharamkanta, Indian Bank Passbook (Sh. Kamalpreet Singh), Canara bank Passbook (Sh. Kamalpreet Singh), HDFC Bank Chequebook, Karur Vysya Bank (Fateh Enterprises Chequebook), Bhodey Dharamkanta, Kotak Mahindra Bank (Chequebook of J R Iron Impex), 1 stamp of J R Iron Impex from the possession of the mother of the applicant/accused, who was present at the premises. It was alleged by the Investigation Agency, that the petitioner operated nine bogus firms, filed ineligible ITC in the sum of Rs.71.35 crores and passed on ineligible ITC in the sum of Rs. 72.77 crores. Hence, the petitioner has committed the offences under above-said sections and subsequently, he was arrested on 11.09.2025. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner approached the Court of learned ASJ at Panchkula praying for grant of bail however, finding no merit, the same was dismissed after hearing both the sides by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchkula vide order dated 04.12.2025. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court by way of filing of present petition for grant of bail.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner has been falsely and frivolously implicated by the respondent in the present case. He submits that the petitioner was allegedly orchestrating and operating multiple fictitious firms which availed and passed on fraudulent ITC to the tune of Rs 88.28 Crores. It is alleged that he facilitated issuance of fake invoices without actual supply of goods, enabling wrongful ITC claims across these dummy entities. It is submitted the petitioner had no proprietary or beneficial interest in any of the firms in question, and was merely engaged in an accounting/consulting capacity. As an accountant, his role was limited to preparing or filing GST returns and maintaining accounts as per instructions of the