Final Order 3

Order Details: COPY OF ORDER
Pdf Text: Bail Matter No. 113/2026
State vs. Himanshu Malik
FIR No. 24/2024
PS: Anti Corruption Branch
08.05.2026
ORDER
This order will decide the application for
anticipatory bail filed on behalf of applicant Himanshu Malik.
Factual matrix:
2. The present case was registered on the basis of
complaint dated 22.12.2023 received from Sh. Karanjit
Vadodaria, Addl. Commissioner (Vigilance). As per the
complaint, after detailed scrutiny/examination conducted by
Department of Trade and Taxes, GNCT of Delhi, it had come to
notice that the then GSTO Sh. Ajit Singh, Ward-34, Grade-1
(DASS) had released 61 Refund Orders amounting to
approximately Rs.5.50 Crores during the period March, 2023 to
August, 2023 in violation of statutory provisions and
departmental safeguards. The departmental scrutiny revealed
grave irregularities including sanction of refunds in mechanical
manner without verification; absence of mandatory financial
parameters; use of fabricated/computer generated invoices; lack
of verification of business premises; processing within 7-10 days
(instead of 60 days) and frequent shifting of business premises
without scrutiny.
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 1
of 11
-- 1 of 11 --
Role of the applicant Himanshu Malik:
3. It is stated by the IO that during the course of
investigation, it was revealed that Himanshu Malik, Lower
Division Clerk (LDC), Assistant to Sh. Ajit Singh, the then
Goods and Service Tax Officer (GSTO), Ward No. 34,
Department of Trade & Taxes, Vyapar Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New
Delhi-110002, was complicit in a well hatched conspiracy of the
persons facilitating the processing and approval of 61 GST
refund orders to firm M/s Regional Trading. These refunds were
processed in violation of the provisions and prevalent procedures
of the GST Act and related regulations.
4. It is the stand of the IO that it has been further
revealed that M/s Regional Trading was fraudulently registered
at a fictitious address i.e. Shop No. 10335, First Floor,
Manakpura, New Delhi-110005 while it did not exist at the said
premises and that the same has been confirmed from the owner
of the property in his statement. It was also stated that it was
revealed that the fraudulent registration was facilitated through a
false verification report and the subsequent approval of GST
refunds was enabled. He stated that during further investigation,
it was found that LDC Himanshu Malik posted in Ward no. 34
provided photographs of the alleged functioning of the firm M/s.
Regional Trading at Shop No. 10335, First Floor, Manakpura,
New Delhi-110005 to GSTI Atal Bhardwaj for completing
verification process, thereby enabling verification of fraudulent
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 2
of 11
-- 2 of 11 --
registration which further enabled illegal refund of GST causing
significant financial loss to the government exchequer.
5. It is the case of the prosecution that the fraudulent
activities of M/s Regional Trading facilitated by Himanshu
Malik, LDC; Atal Bhardwaj, GSTI and Ajit Singh, GSTO in a
well hatched conspiracy with public persons/firms, have resulted
in a financial loss of Rs.5.50 Crores to the government exchequer
through illegal GST refunds. It is further their case that
investigation revealed that immediately after receipt of funds into
Yes Bank Account of M/s Regional Trading, the funds were
layered and transferred into multiple other suspicious bank
accounts of firms, clearly indicating laundering of proceeds of
crime and most of the said firms have been found to be non-
existent.
6. It is further their case that investigation also
revealed that the alleged firm M/s Regional Trading was a
fraudulent and fictitious entity created for the sole purpose of
siphoning off GST refunds. The firm changed its principal place
of business four times within a short span of about one year until
registered at Ward-34 where the alleged Ajit Singh and
Himanshu Malik were posted and immediately after transfer of
the alleged firm M/s Regional Trading to Ward-34, the said firm
started applying refund claims in bulk. Thereafter, within a short
span of time, the said firm received GST refunds fraudulently.
7. It is also their case that investigation has established
a clear money trail linking the proceeds of crime to the family
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 3
of 11
-- 3 of 11 --
members of the applicant Himanshu Malik. A sum of
Rs.25,00,000/- was received in the joint SBI account (A/c No.
20238932149, Sector-24, Rohini, Delhi) of his parents namely
Rajkumar Malik and Usha Malik from one firm M/s Uflix during
October 2023 which coincides with the period when fraudulent
refunds were being disbursed to M/s Regional Trading. The
layered movement of funds is traced from M/s Regional Trading
to M/s Arki Enterprises, onward to M/s Uflix, and further to the
family accounts of the applicant, thereby clearly establishing
receipt of illegal gratification/pecuniary advantage.
8. It is the case of prosecution that financial trail is not
an isolated or accidental occurrence. The investigation revealed
a structured layering of fraudulent GST refund money through
shell entities and the applicant’s role is directly linked to the
same chain of events.
Arguments on behalf of the applicant:
9. Ld. Counsel for the applicant argued that the
applicant is a permanent resident of Delhi and at the time of the
alleged incident, he was posted as Junior Assistant, (Grade-4
Officer) in Ward Nos. 32, 33 & 34 of Vyapar Bhawan,
Department of Trade & Taxes, GNCT of Delhi, New Delhi-
110002. He further submitted that the applicant is the law
abiding citizen having deep roots in the society and he has never
been involved in any criminal matter and has crystal clear
antecedents.
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 4
of 11
-- 4 of 11 --
10. He further submitted that the present FIR was
registered on 18.12.2024 and more than one and a half years
have passed since its registration and it is only now that notice
has been issued to the applicant Himanshu Malik. He also
submitted that during the said entire period, the applicant has
neither absconded nor avoided the investigation and therefore,
there is no reasonable apprehension that the applicant will tamper
with evidence or influence any witness, especially when
sufficient time has already passed and the relevant material is
already within the reach of the Investigating Agency and
therefore, custodial interrogation of the applicant is not required
at this stage. He also submitted that the applicant has already
joined the investigation on multiple occasions and has extended
full and unconditional cooperation and is also willing to
cooperate in future.
11. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submitted that the
applicant is a family man who is having a new born daughter
aged about 20 months and if the applicant is arrested, the whole
family will be affected. He requested that since the fear of being
taken into custody at any time has created an urgent need for
protection, the applicant be granted anticipatory bail to safeguard
his liberty and prevent undue hardship.
12. In support of his submissions, Ld. Counsel for the
applicant has relied upon the cases of Francis Coralie Mullin vs.
Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi & Ors. (1981) 1 SCC
608 and Ishwar Chand vs. State of Himachal Pradesh 1976 Crl. J
386.
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 5
of 11
-- 5 of 11 --
Objection of the State:
13. On the other hand, Ld. PP for the State and the IO
have strongly opposed the application for anticipatory bail.
Ld. PP for the State submitted that allegations against the
applicant are serious in nature and prior approval u/s 17A of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in 2018) for
conducting investigation against the applicant Himanshu Malik
has already been granted by the competent authority. He further
argued that the applicant has not cooperated in investigation and
the case is still under active investigation. He also submitted that
with the money received by the parents of the applicant, a
property has been purchased and thus, the funds have to be traced
for which custodial interrogation is mandatory. He also
submitted that several crucial aspects are pending examination
including confrontation of bank records, digital evidence, to
unearth the full extent of the conspiracy and financial network
and the role of other connected persons in the conspiracy for
which custodial interrogation of the applicant is required and
therefore, and grant of anticipatory bail at this stage is likely to
hamper the ongoing investigation, enable tampering with
evidence, and adversely affect the recovery of relevant material.
14. Heard arguments on behalf of the State as well as
the applicant in respect of the application for anticipatory bail.
The Law:
15. The law relating to consideration of application for
anticipatory bail has been well established in the landmark case
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 6
of 11
-- 6 of 11 --
of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. v State of Punjab AIR 1980 SC
1632, wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court of India observed as
follows:
“It was observed that the principle to be deduced
from the various sections in the Criminal Procedure
Code was that grant of bail Is the rule and refusal is
the exception. An accused person who enjoys
freedom is in a much better position to look after
his case and to properly defend himself than if he
were in custody. As a presumably innocent person
he is therefore entitled to freedom and every
opportunity to look after his own case. A
presumably innocent person must have his freedom
to enable him to establish his innocence.
xxx
It is of paramount consideration to remember that
the freedom of the individual is as necessary for the
survival of the society as it is for the egoistic
purposes of the individual. A person seeking
anticipatory bail is still a free man entitled to the
presumption of innocence. He is willing to submit
to restraints on his freedom, by the acceptance of
conditions which the court may think fit to impose,
in consideration of the assurance that if arrested, he
shall be enlarged on bail.”
16. Further, in the case of Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. v.
State of Bihar & Anr. Criminal Appeal No. 1552 of 2024 dated
14.03.2024, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as follows:
“It is thus obvious from the catena of decisions
dealing with bail that even while clarifying that
arrest should be the last option and it should be
restricted to cases where arrest is imperative in
the facts and circumstances of a case, the
consistent view is that the grant of anticipatory
bail shall be restricted to exceptional
circumstances. In other words, the position is that
the power to grant anticipatory bail under Section
438, Cr. PC is an exceptional power and should
be exercised only in exceptional cases and not as
a matter of course.”
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 7
of 11
-- 7 of 11 --
17. Further, in the case of CBI vs Santosh Karnani &
Anr Criminal Appeal No. 1148/2023 decided on 17.04.2023
, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside an order of grant of
anticipatory bail in a case involving Prevention of Corruption
Act. It was argued before the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the
applicant was not an absconder, that he had no connection with
the crime, that the judgment of Arnesh Kumar Vs. State of Bihar
(2014) 8 SCC 273 applies in favour of the applicant; that
investigation had been initiated without obtaining approval under
Section 17-A of Prevention of Corruption Act. The Hon’ble
Supreme Court observed as follows:
“The nature and gravity of the alleged offence
should have been kept in mind by the High Court.
Corruption poses a serious threat to our society and
must be dealt with iron hands. It not only leads to
abysmal loss to the public exchequer but also
tramples good governance. The common man
stands deprived of the benefits percolating under
social welfare schemes and is the worst hit. It is
aptly said, “Corruption is a tree whose branches are
of an unmeasurable length; they spread
everywhere; and the dew that drops from thence,
Hath infected some chairs and stools of authority.”
Hence, the need to be extra conscious.”
18. Reference must be made to the case of Nikhil
Parasar Vs. State of NCT of Delhi, Bail Application No.
1745/2009, decided on 01.02.1010, wherein Hon’ble High Court
of Delhi has held as follows:
“As observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in
Pokar Ram vs. State of Rajasthan AIR 1985 SC
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 8
of 11
-- 8 of 11 --
969, relevant considerations, governing the Court's
decision in granting anticipatory bail under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, are
materially different from those which apply while
considering application for bail by a person, who is
arrested in the course of investigation or by a
person who is convicted and who seeks bail during
pendency of the appeal. The power of the Court
under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure being somewhat extraordinary in
character should normally be used only where it
appears that the petitioner before the Court may
have been implicated in a false case and there are
reasonable grounds to believe that he has not likely
to otherwise misuse the liberty of bail, if granted to
him.”
19. Further, in the case of Devinder Kumar Bansal v.
The State of Punjab Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 3247 of
2025, Hon’ble Supreme Court of India observed as under:
“21. The parameters fro grant of anticipatory bail in
a serious offence like corruption are required to be
satisfied. Anticipatory bail can be granted only in
exceptional circumstances where the court is prima
facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely
enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically
motivated or are frivolous.”
Examination & Analysis:
20. The factors to be considered while deciding an
application for anticipatory bail are different from the factors that
are to be taken into account for deciding an application for
regular bail. The offence in question is serious. It involves abuse
of an official position by a government servant for the benefit of
certain private persons and himself. During the arguments, Ld.
Counsel for the applicant did not deny the receipt of
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 9
of 11
-- 9 of 11 --
Rs.25,00,000/- from M/s. Uflix into the account of the parents of
the applicant. He also admitted that the parents of the applicant
have now purchased a property with that money. On questioning
by the court, Ld. Counsel for the applicant stated that the owner
of M/s. Uflix is a friend of the applicant and on his request, M/s.
Uflix had extended a friendly loan of Rs. 25,00,000/- to the
parents of the applicant. On further questioning, he stated there is
no loan agreement but was not sure if the factum of loan has
been mentioned in the ITR. This court finds it strange to an
extent of unacceptable that M/s. Regional Trading transferred a
particular amount of money to M/s. Arki that further transferred
an amount to M/s Uflix which transferred it to the account of the
parents of the applicant just a couple of months after M/s.
Regional Trading received the alleged illegal GST refunds. The
fact that the friendly loan has been given from a company
account and not a personal account as well as the fact that there
is no loan agreement raise further doubt on the whole so called
friendly loan transaction. Since the factum of transfer of Rs. 25
Lakhs has been admitted on behalf of the applicant, this court
finds sufficient reasons to believe that the applicant needs to be
interrogated to unearth the truth about the funds received through
illegal GST refunds. It is also the case of the state that they need
to conduct custodial interrogation of the accused so as to
confront the applicant with the bank records, recover his mobile
phone and digital signatures and find out the full extent of the
conspiracy and financial network and the role of other connected
persons. Keeping in view the above as well as the gravity of the
allegations, this court is of the view that the case is not fit for
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 10
of 11
-- 10 of 11 --
protecting the applicant from arrest, thereby frustrating the right
of the police to investigate the case and to collect evidence.
The application is accordingly disposed off.
Copy of this order be given dasti to Ld. Counsel for
applicant/accused.
(Dr. Ruchi Aggarwal Asrani)
Special Judge (PC Act)(ACB)-02
Rouse Avenue District Courts
New Delhi/08.05.2026
Bail App. No. 113/26 in FIR No. 24/24 State vs. Himanshu Malik Page 11
of 11
-- 11 of 11 --