Prima facie criminal offences were not disclosed in a GST compliance dispute over intercepted goods and missing transport documents.

Allegations arising from interception of goods and non-production of transportation documents did not disclose prima facie offences under cheating, disobedience of a promulgated order, or copyright infringement. The court noted that cheating requires deception, dishonest inducement, and delivery of property, none of which was alleged; Section 188 IPC was not attracted because no duly promulgated order and disobedience were shown; and non-production of invoices did not, on the face of the record, establish Section 63 of the Copyright Act. The dispute was treated as one of GST compliance, to be examined by the tax authorities, and interim protection from arrest was granted pending further proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether the first information report disclosed a prima facie case under Sections 420 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957, and whether interim protection against arrest was warranted.

Analysis: The allegations were confined to interception of goods and inability to show transportation documents. The ingredients of cheating were not found to be disclosed because there was no allegation of deception, dishonest inducement, or delivery of property. The requirement for an offence under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was also not made out, as there was no allegation of disobedience of any duly promulgated order. The alleged non-production of invoices did not, on the face of the record, constitute an offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957. The matter was viewed as one relating to GST compliance, for which the tax authorities were the competent forum to examine invoices, seize goods, and proceed in accordance with law.

Outcome: Interim protection from arrest was granted till the next date fixed, and a counter affidavit was called for.

---