Anticipatory bail in GST inquiries may be granted when arrest is not necessary and cooperation continues.

Anticipatory bail in a GST inquiry may be granted where summons and statement recording are ongoing and arrest is not shown to be necessary for a fair investigation. The HC applied Article 21 and Section 438 CrPC, holding that the existence of penal provisions under the CGST Act does not make arrest inevitable. It noted that coercive custody is generally reserved for exceptional cases such as habitual offenders or where credible material justifies immediate arrest. As the applicant had no prior criminal antecedents, had cooperated, and the inquiry could proceed without custodial interrogation, limited protection from arrest was warranted during the pendency of the inquiry.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to an applicant summoned in a GST inquiry on the apprehension of arrest during proceedings under the CGST Act.

Analysis: The inquiry was at the stage of summons and statement recording under the CGST framework. The Court considered that the allegations had not yet resulted in a completed adjudication and that arrest is not to be treated as inevitable merely because the statute contains penal provisions. It relied on the principle that personal liberty under Article 21 must be protected, that anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be granted where arrest is not for a fair inquiry, and that coercive arrest is generally reserved for exceptional cases such as habitual offenders or where credible material justifies immediate custody. The applicant had no prior criminal antecedents, had offered cooperation, and the inquiry could continue without custodial arrest.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was warranted and the applicant was entitled to limited protection during the pendency of the inquiry.

---