Faisal Malik v. The Senior Intelligence Officer Director General Of Gst Intelligence (Dggi)
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7616 OF 2026 DATE: 08.06.2026 Between :
Faisal Malik.
...
Petitioner/Accused And The Senior Intelligence Officer, Director General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) Hyderabad Zonal Unit, # 1-63/2/212, Plot No.211 and 212, Block-B, Kavuri Hills Guttala Begumpet, Madhapur, Hyderabad.
...
Respondent/Complainant : ORDER :
This Criminal Petition is filed under Sections 480 & 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakhsha Sanhita, 2023 praying this Court to enlarge the petitioner on bail who is arrayed as accused in F.No.DGGI/INV/GST.363/2026-Gr-L of the Director General of GST Intelligence, Hyderabad.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that Senior Intelligence Officer received complaint from the de-facto complainant wherein it is stated that the petitioner/accused, who is managing partner of M/s.F.K.Metals Traders was engaged in availment passing of fraudulent Input Tax Credit to the tune of Rs.30 Crores approximately from certain entities floated end beneficiaries on the pretext of receipt/procurement of Metal Scrap, and to that effect, on receipt of said information, they registered the case for the offences punishable under Sections 132(1) (b)(c)(1) and Section 132(5) of CGTST Act, 2017. 3.
Heard Sri Mohd. Moin Ahmed Quadri, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri M. Ramachandra Reddy, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been illegally arrayed as an accused and is innocent of the allegations levelled against him. It is further submitted that the petitioner is not engaged in any illegal activity relating to the obtaining of Input Tax Credit. Although there are clear statements regarding the business carried on by him, he has been falsely implicated in the present crime without any fault on his part. He further submitted that the petitioner
has been in judicial custody since 10.04.2026. Therefore, he prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant regular bail to the petitioner by allowing the present criminal petition. 5.
On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is the mastermind behind the present crime. Though accused No.2 has been granted bail, the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. It is further submitted that he is involved in issuance of several fake invoices and an amount of Rs. 30 crores is involved in the present case. The investigation has not yet been completed. Therefore, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to be enlarged on bail, and the learned Public Prosecutor prayed that this Court may be pleased to dismiss the present petition. 6.
Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and upon perusal of the material available on record, it shows that the petitioner has been in judicial custody since 10.04.2026 in jail and the allegation against the petitioner is that he facilitated accused No.2 to avail ITC without there being any business. As seen from the record, the alleged offence is punishable with five years imprisonment and 60 days have been completed. The petitioner is in jail, no
complaint has been filed as an today . Taking into consideration the nature of the allegations and the period of incarceration of the petitioner since 10.04.2026, this Court is inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions: i.
The petitioner shall execute a personal bond for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) with two sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, Economic Offences, Nampally, Hyderabad.
ii.
The petitioner shall appear before the respondent authorities between 09.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. on every Monday and Friday till one month, as and when required. Further, the petitioner is directed not to influence any witness.
iii.
The petitioner shall abide by the conditions stipulated in Section 483(2) of the BNSS.
7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand closed.
_______________ K. SUJANA, J Date: 08.06.2026 FM
THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.7616 OF 2026 Date: 08.06.2026 FM