Interim protection against arrest under the CGST Act declined where custodial interrogation could not be ruled out.

Interim protection against arrest in a writ challenge to the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act was declined. The Court noted the statutory offences framework under the Act, the constitutional competence under Article 246-A, and the relevance of general criminal procedure provisions. It further observed that the investigation was at a stage where custodial interrogation could not be ruled out, and expressly refrained from recording any final view on the merits of the constitutional challenge or the investigation. On those facts, interference in writ jurisdiction for interim relief was found unwarranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to interim protection against arrest during the pendency of the writ petition challenging the vires of Sections 69 and 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The prayer was considered only at the interim stage. The Court noted the statutory framework governing offences under the CGST Act, the constitutional competence under Article 246-A, and the relevance of the general criminal procedure provisions. It also noted that the investigation was at a stage where custodial interrogation could not be ruled out and that the Court did not intend to record any final opinion on the merits of the constitutional challenge or the investigative action. In these circumstances, interference in writ jurisdiction for interim protection was found unwarranted.

Conclusion: Interim protection against arrest was declined.

---