Headnote
AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved
The applicant Sanjay Jindal sought bail in three connected criminal cases arising out of FIRs registered at Police Station Noida Sector-20, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B IPC. The FIRs alleged that unknown persons fraudulently obtained GST registrations by misusing the PAN cards and personal credentials of innocent third parties without their consent, including a journalist, a private individual, and another complainant who discovered fictitious GST numbers registered against his documents.
The applicant contended that he was not named in any of the FIRs, that no incriminating material linked him to the creation of fake firms or forged documents, that no co-accused had implicated him, and that only a mobile phone was recovered from him. He further sought parity with co-accused Rajiv Jindal who had been granted bail by the Supreme Court. The State opposed bail citing the seriousness of the organised fraud involving misuse of identity documents for fraudulent GST registrations.
The Court examined the prosecution case, the role attributed to the applicant during investigation, and the arguments on parity and absence of direct evidence of conspiracy, with reference to the Supreme Court's judgment in Maghavendra Pratap Singh @ Pankaj Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh, in the context of the applicant's continued custody since 21 March 2024.
Catchwords:
bail · GST fraud · fake GST registration · misuse of PAN card · forgery · cheating · criminal conspiracy · parity with co-accused · identity theft · organised fraud
Headnote © LegalFirms.in. Section 52(1)(q)(iv) of the Copyright Act, 1957 allows a court's
judgment to be reproduced unless the court has prohibited it.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.
