GST evasion arrests need not await assessment when investigation risk, evidence tampering, and witness interference justify custody.

In serious GST evasion matters, arrest under the GST law is not contingent on completion of assessment proceedings. The Court stated that Section 132 offences may justify arrest under Section 69 when the statutory conditions are satisfied and custody is necessary to secure a fair investigation, prevent tampering with evidence, and avoid influence over witnesses. On the facts, alleged suppression of turnover, seizure of business records, and the early stage of investigation supported continued custody. Bail was therefore declined and release was refused at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted in a case alleging large-scale GST evasion and whether arrest under the GST law can be postponed until assessment is completed.

Analysis: The allegations disclosed suppression of turnover on a substantial scale, seizure of business records, and an apprehension that evidence could be altered and witnesses influenced. The Court held that offences under Section 132 of the GST law are not dependent on completion of assessment proceedings. It further held that the power to arrest under Section 69 may be exercised when the statutory conditions are satisfied and where arrest is necessary for a proper investigation and to prevent tampering with evidence. The Court also found that the case was at a nascent stage and that continued custody was warranted in the facts.

Conclusion: Bail was declined and the petitioner was not entitled to release at that stage.

Final Conclusion: The decision affirms that in serious GST evasion cases, bail may be refused where investigation is at an early stage and the material indicates a risk of interference with the inquiry, and that arrest is not contingent on prior completion of assessment.

Ratio Decidendi: For offences under Section 132 of the GST law, the power of arrest is independent of completion of assessment and may be exercised where the statutory ingredients are made out and custody is necessary to secure a fair investigation and prevent interference with evidence.

---