Prolonged custody and limited maximum sentence justified regular bail in a CGST prosecution pending pre-charge evidence.

Regular bail under Section 439 CrPC was granted in a CGST Act prosecution because the accused had been in custody since 20.6.2018, the maximum prescribed punishment was five years, and the trial remained at the pre-charge evidence stage. The Court treated prolonged pre-trial incarceration and the absence of any near-term prospect of trial completion as material factors favouring release, while expressly refraining from expressing any view on the merits of the allegations. On those facts, continued detention was held unjustified and release on bail on terms was ordered.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, accused of offences under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in view of the period of custody, the maximum punishment prescribed, and the stage of the trial.

Analysis: The petition was considered in the context of the seriousness of the allegations, the petitioner's custody since 20.6.2018, the maximum punishment of five years, and the fact that the case was still at the stage of pre-charge evidence. The Court treated the prolonged custody and the absence of any near-term possibility of trial completion as material factors supporting release on bail, while making it clear that no opinion was expressed on the merits of the case.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to regular bail.

Final Conclusion: The petition was allowed and the petitioner was ordered to be released on bail on terms, reflecting that continued pre-trial incarceration was not justified on the facts of the case.

Ratio Decidendi: Prolonged custody, coupled with a comparatively limited maximum sentence and no imminent conclusion of trial, can justify grant of regular bail even in serious economic offence cases.

---