Economic offences under GST can justify denial of bail where the alleged conduct is serious and impacts the national economy.

In a second bail application arising from an alleged offence under Section 132 of the CGST Act, the Allahabad HC held that the earlier rejection on merits remained relevant and that the alleged conduct constituted a serious economic offence affecting the national economy. On that basis, the Court found no sufficient ground to enlarge the applicant on bail and refused bail. The direction for expeditious trial was only ancillary and did not affect the custody decision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to bail in a prosecution alleging offences under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

Analysis: The application was a second bail application. The earlier bail request had already been rejected on merits. The present request was considered on the additional grounds urged, but the Court treated the alleged offence as an economic offence of a serious nature affecting the national economy. On that basis, the Court found no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail. The direction for expeditious trial was given as an ancillary measure and did not alter the refusal of bail.

Conclusion: Bail was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Economic offences form a distinct and serious class of crimes, and bail may be refused where the nature of the and its economic impact justify continued custody.

---