Bail in GST offences granted where no concrete risk of flight, tampering, or obstruction of trial was shown.

Bail under Section 439 CrPC was held appropriate for an accused facing GST offences because bail is not punitive, and seriousness of the allegation or punishment alone is not decisive. The Court found no concrete material showing a risk of flight, tampering with evidence, or obstruction of trial, noted that the offence was triable by a Magistrate, and observed that the alleged loss was quantifiable and recoverable. It also took into account the period of custody, the presumption of innocence before conviction, and the likelihood of delay in trial. On these factors, the petitioner was entitled to release on bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, accused of offences under the GST law, was entitled to be released on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: Bail is not punitive or preventive, and the seriousness of the allegation or the severity of punishment by itself is not decisive. The relevant considerations are whether the accused is likely to flee, tamper with evidence, or otherwise obstruct the trial. In the present case, no concrete material was shown to indicate such apprehension. The offence was triable by a Magistrate, the alleged loss was quantifiable and recoverable, and criminal prosecution could proceed independently of recovery proceedings. The Court also considered the period of custody, the presumption of innocence at the pre-conviction stage, and the likelihood that the trial would take time.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to bail.

---