Anticipatory bail under GST remains available where no statutory bar exists and arrest is reasonably apprehended.

In the absence of any express or implied bar in the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC remains available for a person who reasonably apprehends arrest for GST offences. The Court noted that Section 69 empowers arrest where the Commissioner has reason to believe an offence under Section 132 has been committed, and accepted that cognizable, non-bailable GST allegations may justify pre-arrest protection. On the facts, involving alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit and issued summons, the Court treated anticipatory bail as maintainable and granted protection from arrest subject to conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether a petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable in relation to apprehended arrest under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and whether the petitioner was entitled to such relief on the facts of the case.

Analysis: The arrest power under Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 operates where the Commissioner has reason to believe that an offence under Section 132 has been committed. The judgment notes that the Act contains no express or implied bar against invoking Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for offences under the tax law. The Court relied on prior decisions dealing with similar GST prosecutions and accepted that, where the alleged offence is cognizable and non-bailable, a person apprehending arrest may seek anticipatory bail. On the facts, the allegations concerned alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit, summons had been issued, and the Court found that arrest could lead to judicial custody and hardship without any statutory prohibition against pre-arrest bail.

Conclusion: The petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was maintainable, and the petitioner was held entitled to anticipatory bail.

Final Conclusion: Protection from arrest was granted in respect of the anticipated action under the GST investigation, subject to conditions imposed by the Court.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of any express or implied statutory bar in the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 remains available to a person who reasonably apprehends arrest for offences under the GST regime.

---