Pre-arrest protection under GST was refused where statutory safeguards existed and no concrete apprehension of arrest was shown.

A writ of mandamus under Article 226 to restrain arrest in a GST investigation was not warranted where Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 already required statutory safeguards, including reasons to believe and communication of grounds of arrest. On the facts, the department had not moved for arrest and there was no concrete apprehension justifying exceptional pre-arrest interference. The petition was therefore held premature and untenable, and judicial restraint was declined because the statutory framework itself provided protection before arrest.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could be granted to restrain arrest in connection with summons issued under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The petition sought pre-arrest protection in the context of GST summons and investigation. The Court noted that the arrest power under Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 is controlled by statutory safeguards, including the requirement of reasons to believe and communication of grounds of arrest. It further noted that, on the facts, the department had not yet moved for arrest and there was no present apprehension warranting interference. In view of the statutory scheme and the circumstances placed before it, the case did not fall within the exceptional category justifying issuance of a writ to prevent the exercise of statutory powers.

Conclusion: No writ of mandamus or pre-arrest protection was granted; the petition was held to be premature and untenable on the facts.

Final Conclusion: Interference was declined because the statutory framework under the GST law already provided safeguards before arrest and no immediate basis for judicial restraint was made out.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ to prevent arrest under the GST regime should not be granted where the statute itself contains pre-arrest safeguards and no concrete apprehension of arrest is shown.

---