Anticipatory bail on parity under the CGST Act was granted where the applicant's case matched a co-accused's.

Anticipatory bail was granted to an applicant proceeded against on summons under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for alleged contravention under Section 132(1)(c). The applicant relied on parity with a co-accused partner who had already received anticipatory bail, and the Court treated the applicant's case as identical for bail purposes. Without expressing any view on the merits, the nature of the accusation and the parity with the co-accused were treated as sufficient grounds for relief, and the application was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail in a case arising from summons issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on the basis of parity with a co-accused and the nature of the accusation.

Analysis: The applicant was proceeded against pursuant to summons issued under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in connection with alleged contravention attracting Section 132(1)(c) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The co-accused, who was a partner of the firm, had already been granted anticipatory bail. The Court found the applicant's case to be identical for the purpose of bail, and, without expressing any opinion on the merits, considered the nature of the accusation and the parity with the co-accused as sufficient grounds to grant relief.

Conclusion: The applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail and the application was allowed.

---