Anticipatory bail requires real apprehension of arrest; without a CGST arrest proposal, the application was premature.

Anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is discretionary and requires a real, reasonable apprehension of arrest; mere suspicion is insufficient. Where arrest under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 depends on prior written approval by the competent authority on a reason-to-believe basis, and no arrest proposal or approval exists, the apprehension of arrest has not matured into a basis for relief. The application was therefore premature and not maintainable at that stage.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application for anticipatory bail was premature in the absence of any proposal or written approval for arrest under the CGST Act.

Analysis: The power under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is discretionary and is attracted only where the applicant shows a real reason to believe that arrest may ensue. Mere apprehension or suspicion is insufficient. In the present case, arrest under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 required prior written approval by the competent authority on the basis of reason to believe, but no such proposal existed against the applicant. In these circumstances, the apprehension of arrest was treated as not yet matured into a basis for invoking anticipatory bail.

Conclusion: The application was premature and was not maintainable for grant of anticipatory bail at this stage.

Ratio Decidendi: Anticipatory bail can be sought only when there is a real and reasonable apprehension of arrest; where the statutory precondition for arrest has not arisen and no arrest proposal exists, the application is premature.

---