Anticipatory bail in GST offences turns on prima facie involvement, custodial need, and risk of interference with investigation

Anticipatory bail was granted because the investigation material did not show direct prima facie involvement in the alleged GST evasion, and custodial interrogation was not demonstrated to be necessary. The Court also found no credible material suggesting that the accused would abscond, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses. On that basis, the apprehension of arrest for the alleged non-bailable offences was sufficient to justify pre-arrest protection under Section 438 CrPC.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in connection with alleged offences under the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The material collected at the stage of investigation did not disclose direct prima facie involvement of the petitioner in the alleged tax evasion. The allegations were based essentially on statements recorded during enquiry, and the petitioner was not shown to be required for custodial interrogation. The Court also found no material to indicate that the petitioner would abscond, tamper with evidence, or influence witnesses. In these circumstances, the apprehension of arrest for the alleged non-bailable offences justified grant of protection under Section 438.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to anticipatory bail and the request for pre-arrest protection was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: Anticipatory bail may be granted where the investigating material does not disclose a prima facie case of direct involvement and custodial interrogation is not shown to be necessary, provided there is no credible risk of absconding or interference with the investigation.

---