Lawyer accused of facilitating ₹22L bribe in GST evasion case denied bail

The bribe was meant for a Directorate General of GST intelligence officer towards “settlement of an enquiry” into alleged GST evasion by entities linked to certain offshore betting platforms

Mumbai: A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Thursday denied anticipatory bail to advocate Priyanka Singh, accused of facilitating a ₹22-lakh bribe for a Directorate General of GST intelligence officer towards “settlement of an enquiry” into alleged GST evasion by entities linked to certain offshore betting platforms.

Lawyer accused of facilitating ₹22L bribe in GST evasion case denied bail

Special CBI judge AP Kanade denied bail to Singh, saying the material gathered during verification, including recorded conversations and transcripts of a meeting at the Taj Hotel in Kolkata where Singh was present, disclosed her “active participation” in the alleged conspiracy.

According to the first information report (FIR), the case pertains to non-compliance by certain online betting platforms (such as lordexch.com and lotusbook247.com) and financial transactions involving Artimbe IT Pvt Ltd and Appnit Technologies Pvt Ltd. The complainant, intelligence officer Vivek Pratap Singh, received the first call from Singh on August 14, while seeking account and customer details from the companies, the FIR said.

Priyanka Singh introduced herself to the officer during the first call as the accused firms’ advocate while co-accused Abhishek Katiyar, a superintendent with CGST, offered him a bribe for “settlement of the enquiry” during subsequent calls and meetings, the CBI told the court. Singh later attended a meeting at the Taj Hotel in Kolkata where the bribe amount of ₹22 lakh was confirmed, the CBI said.

The court noted that Singh’s explanation – that she believed the sum to be legitimate “tax and fine” to be deposited in Delhi – was contradicted by pre-trap transcripts.

“Considering the pre-trap verification and documents on record, there is no reason to believe that the applicant/accused has been falsely enroped in the crime and the allegations are motivated or false,” the judge observed.

The judgement said that after the FIR was registered, the complainant called Singh to confirm the delivery location for the bribe, and she said a certain Ramsevak Singh alias RS Thakur would deliver the amount. Ramsevak Singh and another accused were subsequently arrested red-handed, while handing over ₹22,00,500 to the officer.

The CBI opposed Singh’s anticipatory bail plea, saying custodial interrogation was required to “unearth the larger conspiracy”, determine the roles of other individuals, examine her communications with the co-accused and company officials, and trace the “trail of ₹22 lakhs offered as bribe and its sources”.

Judge Kanade accepted this position, saying, “Considering the prima facie case, ongoing investigation, active involvement of the applicant in the commission of the crime and need of her custodial interrogation, this application is without merit.”