Gauhati High Court allows pre-arrest bail in BNS cheating and GST fraud allegations

Background of the case

The matter in Shyama Kant Mishra Vs State of Assam (Gauhati High Court) arose from an application seeking pre-arrest (anticipatory) bail in relation to an FIR alleging cheating, criminal breach of trust, forgery and fraudulent GST-related transactions. The case is governed by provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, specifically Sections 318(4), 316(2), 336(3) read with Section 3(5).

An FIR was lodged on 15.05.2026 by Yakub Ali Bhemat, who complained that the petitioner, while associated with his business, was involved in fraudulent activities connected with GST transactions in concert with proprietors of other entities. The period of the alleged transactions was indicated as between 2024-2026.

The petitioner approached the Gauhati High Court seeking protection from arrest in connection with the said FIR.

FIR allegations and nature of accusations

Contents of the FIR

As recorded in the order, the FIR made the following core allegations:

  • The petitioner was allegedly engaged in:

    • Cheating
    • Criminal breach of trust
    • Forgery
    • Fraudulent GST transactions

  • The factual backdrop suggested that:

    • During 2024-2026, the petitioner was stated to be working with the informant’s company.
    • Certain business dealings were said to have occurred between the petitioner and proprietors of other companies.
    • In the course of such dealings, input tax credit (ITC) facilities were allegedly availed by these other companies.
    • It was also alleged that the petitioner derived some consideration/benefit in connection with these transactions.

  • The FIR further mentioned that:

    • The petitioner’s son, Deepak Mishra, was also involved in the alleged incident.

The accusations, therefore, were not confined to ordinary commercial differences but were framed as criminal offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, coupled with fraudulent use of GST mechanisms such as ITC.

Relevant penal provisions invoked

The pre-arrest bail application referred to the following provisions:

  • Section 318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
  • Section 316(2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
  • Section 336(3) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
  • Read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023

These provisions collectively cover serious offences including cheating and allied wrongful conduct, forming the legal basis for the FIR and investigation.

Petitioner’s contentions before the Court

Counsel for the petitioner advanced multiple grounds seeking protection from arrest. The submissions, as noted in the order, can be summarized as follows:

Employment history and timeline

  • The petitioner was admittedly an employee of the informant’s business concern.
  • However, it was specifically contended that:
    • The petitioner had severed his employment in 2024, i.e., he had left the informant’s company “way back in 2024”.
  • Although the FIR mentioned the operative period of alleged offences as 2024-2026, the petitioner’s side argued:
    • There was no contemporaneous information or complaint about any such alleged criminal act in the year 2024 itself.
    • Given that he had already dissociated from the informant’s enterprise in 2024, his role in the alleged transactions covering the broader period 2024-2026 was disputed.

Non-mention of petitioner’s name in FIR