Anticipatory bail in GST fraud investigations may be refused where prima facie material shows mastermind role and custodial interrogation is necessary.

In a serious GST investigation involving alleged fake invoices and wrongful input tax credit, the HC found prima facie material suggesting the applicant's active role as the mastermind and prime beneficiary. It held that the magnitude and complexity of the alleged fraud justified custodial interrogation, and the need for such interrogation weighed against pre-arrest protection. Relying on the confidential material placed before it and the denial of relief to a co-accused with a similar or lesser role, the Court declined anticipatory bail and held that the applicant was not entitled to protection under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in connection with the GST investigation.

Analysis: The application arose from an investigation into a large GST evasion network involving alleged fake invoices, substantial wrongful input tax credit, and material suggesting the applicant's active role. The Court relied on confidential material placed before it, found a prima facie case indicating that the applicant was the mastermind and a prime beneficiary, and considered custodial interrogation necessary in view of the magnitude and complexity of the alleged scam. The Court also noted that a co-accused with a similar or lesser role had already been denied relief and that the refusal had not been interfered with.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined and the applicant was not entitled to protection under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Ratio Decidendi: In a serious economic offence involving large-scale GST fraud and prima facie incriminating material, anticipatory bail may be refused where custodial interrogation is found necessary.

---