SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH - PRINCIPAL BENCH CHHATTISGARH
PARITOSH KUMAR SINGH ALIAS DIWAKAR CHOUDHARY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WA 348/2021



Advocates:
['M L SAKAT', '', 'ANMOL SHARMA', 'RAZA ALI', 'NITESH JAIN', 'ANUJA SHARMA', 'B P SHARMA', 'CHAKRESH TIWARI', 'Manay Nath thakur', 'Trishna Das', 'A G', '', 'MANEESH SHARMA']

1

AFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Judgment reserved on : 21.03.2022

Judgment delivered on : 22.04.2022

Writ Appeal No. 348 of 2021

1. Paritosh Kumar Singh alias Diwakar Choudhary aged about 39

years, S/o Smt. Kamla Devi, resident of House No. 3399, Ward

No. 61, Rawatpura Colony, Bhathagaon, Raipur (CG) in Jail

acting in the premises through Manish Singh, S/o Akhilesh

Kumar Singh, A/a 30 Years (Brother of petitioner No. 1) resident

of House No. 3399, Ward No. 61, Rawatpura Colony,

Bhatagaon, Raipur (CG)

2. Ravi Kumar Tiwari alias Bablu Mishra, son of Shri Umashankar

Tiwari, aged about 36 Years, resident of House No. 3399, Ward

No. 61, Rawatpura Colony, Bhathagaon, Raipur (CG) In Jail

acting in the premises through Manish Singh, S/o Akhilesh

Kumar Singh, A/a 30 Years (Brother of petitioner No. 1) resident

of House No. 3399, Ward No. 61, Rawatpura Colony,

Bhatagaon, Raipur (CG)

3. Munna Tiwari alias Bablu Mishra, son of Shri Umashankar

Tiwari, aged about 38 Years, R/o Village Belwasa, Mathiya, P.S

& Post Aadar, District- Siwan, Bihar. In Jail acting in the

premises through Manish Singh, S/o Akhilesh Kumar Singh, A/a

30 Years (Brother of petitioner No. 1), R/o House No. 3399,

Ward No. 61, Rawatpura Colony, Bhatagaon, Raipur (CG)

4. Kaushal Tiwari alias Bablu Mishra, son of Shri Umashankar

Tiwari, aged about 40 Years, R/o Village Belwasa, Mathiya, P.S

& Post Aadar, District- Siwan, Bihar. In Jail acting in the

premises through Manish Singh, S/o Akhilesh Kumar Singh, A/a

30 Years (Brother of petitioner No. 1), resident of House No.

3399, Ward No. 61, Rawatpura Colony, Bhatagaon, Raipur (CG)

---- Appellants/Petitioners

2

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh through the District Magistrate, Raipur

(CG)

2. Senior Intelligence Officer, Director General Of GST, 4th Floor

Complex, Lalapur, Opposite Fruit Market, Raipur, District- Raipur

(CG)

---- Respondents

For Appellants

:

Shri B.P. Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1/State

:

Smt. Meena Shastri, Addl. A.G.

For Respondent No.2

:

Shri Maneesh Sharma, Advocate.

Hon’ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon’ble Shri Gautam Chourdiya, Judge

C A V JUDGMENT

Per Gautam Chourdiya, J

Challenge in this writ appeal is to the legality, validity and

propriety of the order dated 1.10.2021 passed by the learned Single

Judge in WPCR No.469/2021 dismissing the said writ petition filed

against the order dated 26.6.2021 passed by the 5th Additional

Sessions Judge, Raipur in Criminal Revision No.62/2021 by which the

revisional Court affirmed the order dated 12.5.2021 of the Chief

Judicial Magistrate, Raipur rejecting the application filed by the

appellants/petitioners under Section 167 of CrPC for grant of default

bail.

02.

Facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants created several

fictitious and physically non-existent trading company firms in

Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal and

3

Maharashtra, got them registered in GSTN portal online using identity

credential of several persons using forged PAN and issued fake bills to

transmit fake Income Tax Credit (ITC) to several other traders. For the

said purpose, the appellants had fraudulently shown in their GST

returns to have procured several kinds of goods from within and across

the State. The Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax

Intelligence, Raipur Zonal Unit, Raipur cracked this racket on the basis

of intelligence against a taxpayer, namely, M/s Manoj Enterprises, who

during the month of July, 2020 and August, 2020, claimed Rs.44.72

crores from ITC by way of trading activities even when their statutory

returns did not indicate purchase of any such goods for trade. On the

basis of information gathered, the appellants No.1 & 2 were arrested

for the offence under Section 132(1)(b) & (c) of the Central Goods and

Service Tax Act, 2017 (in short “t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top