Bail in GST prosecution allowed after charge sheet filing, limited further investigation, and low tampering risk.

Accused persons prosecuted under Section 132 of the CGST Act were entitled to bail where the charge sheet had already been filed, further investigation was limited to a supplementary charge sheet, and the prosecution case rested mainly on seized documentary and electronic material. The Court treated the risk of witness influence and tampering as remote because the proposed witnesses were departmental officers, noted that the matter was triable by a magistrate with a maximum punishment of five years, and considered nearly eleven months of custody excessive. Refusal of bail was therefore set aside and bail was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellants, arrested in a prosecution under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, were entitled to bail pending trial.

Analysis: The record showed that the charge sheet had already been filed under Section 193 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, while further investigation was said to be continuing only for a supplementary charge sheet. The proposed witnesses were departmental officers, making the possibility of witness influence remote. The prosecution case substantially rested on documentary and electronic material already seized, so the risk of tampering was considered unlikely. The case was triable by a magistrate, the maximum punishment was five years, and the appellants had already remained in custody for nearly eleven months. In these circumstances, continued pre-trial detention was found unnecessary.

Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to bail and the refusal of bail was set aside.

---