Bail in GST prosecution turns on unascertained tax liability, limited punishment, and absence of custodial necessity.

Bail in a CGST prosecution depends on the nature of the accusation, the supporting material, the severity of punishment, the accused's role, antecedents, and the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The Court noted that the alleged offence carried a maximum sentence of five years, no GST recovery notice had been issued, and tax liability or penalty had not yet been ascertained. It also treated the offence as compoundable and triable by a Magistrate. On these facts, the Court granted bail subject to conditions, without expressing any view on the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted in a prosecution under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, having regard to the nature of the accusation, the stage of ascertainment of tax liability, the maximum punishment prescribed, and the settled principles governing grant of bail.

Analysis: The Court applied the settled principles that bail depends on the nature of the accusation, the supporting material, the severity of punishment, the character and role of the accused, antecedents, and the likelihood of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. It noted that the alleged offence was punishable up to five years, that no GST recovery notice had been issued, that penalty or tax had not yet been ascertained, and that the offence was stated to be compoundable and triable by a Magistrate. On the overall facts, the Court found the case fit for grant of bail, without expressing any view on the merits.

Conclusion: Bail was granted to the applicant, subject to conditions.

Ratio Decidendi: In a bail application, where the alleged fiscal offence carries a limited maximum sentence, the tax liability has not yet been ascertained, and the circumstances do not justify continued custody, bail may be granted subject to protective conditions.

---