Bail in CGST prosecution granted where custody was substantial, evidence was documentary, and co-accused had already obtained bail.

Bail under Section 439 CrPC was granted to an accused facing offences under the CGST Act, 2017, because he had remained in custody since 12.07.2023, had no similar criminal antecedents, and the alleged offence carried a maximum punishment of five years and fine. The Court also noted that the co-accused had already been released on bail and that the prosecution case related mainly to tax evasion supported by documentary and electronic material. Relying on the Supreme Court's bail approach in a similar matter and without expressing any view on the merits, the Court ordered release on bond and sureties.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, accused of offences under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, was entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The petitioner was in custody since 12.07.2023, had no criminal antecedents of similar nature, and the alleged offence carried a maximum punishment of up to five years and fine. The Court also noted that the other two persons involved in the case had already been enlarged on bail. The allegations concerned tax evasion in a matter where the evidence was primarily documentary and electronic, and the Court relied upon the Supreme Court's bail approach in a similar case while declining to comment on the merits of the prosecution.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to bail and was ordered to be released on furnishing the directed bond and sureties.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, bail may be granted where the accused has undergone substantial custody, has no antecedents, the alleged punishment is limited, and the evidence is principally documentary in nature.

---