Anticipatory bail in tax inquiry upheld where cooperation, no antecedents, and liberty concerns outweighed arrest.

Anticipatory bail was granted in a pending inquiry under the CGST framework because the applicants were cooperating, had responded to summons and produced documents, and the alleged tax evasion had not yet been finally determined. The court considered that arrest was unnecessary while the inquiry remained ongoing and cooperation was maintained, and that personal liberty under Article 21 could be protected by bail. The absence of criminal antecedents and the furnishing of monetary security also supported relief. The bail was made subject to conditions, including online interrogation, execution of a personal bond, and an indemnity bond to ensure cooperation and appearance.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicants were entitled to anticipatory bail during pendency of inquiry under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The inquiry under Section 70 was still pending, the applicants had been cooperating by responding to summons and submitting documents, and the alleged tax evasion was yet to be finally determined. The Court considered that arrest was not necessary where cooperation in the inquiry was being maintained, and that personal liberty under Article 21 could be protected through anticipatory bail. The applicants had no criminal antecedents on record and had already furnished monetary security during the interim arrangement.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was granted, subject to conditions including online interrogation, execution of a personal bond, and an indemnity bond to secure cooperation and appearance.

---