Regular bail under the GST law granted where investigation was complete, evidence was documentary, and custody served no further purpose.

Regular bail was granted in a prosecution under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 because the petitioner had complied with the interim bail conditions, including furnishing the bank guarantee. The investigation had been completed, the complaint had been filed, and proceedings under Section 74 had been initiated. As the case was based mainly on documentary evidence and the petitioner had already spent a substantial period in custody, the Court found that returning him to custody would serve no purpose. The interim bail order was therefore made absolute.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail in a prosecution under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The petitioner had already complied with the conditions imposed while granting interim bail, including furnishing the bank guarantee. The investigation had been completed, the complaint had been filed, and proceedings under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 had been initiated. The case was primarily based on documentary evidence, and the petitioner had remained in custody for a substantial period. In these circumstances, sending the petitioner back into custody was found to serve no purpose.

Conclusion: Regular bail was granted and the earlier interim bail order was made absolute in favour of the petitioner.

---