GST recovery mechanisms limit use of criminal custody for tax dues, and bail was granted on that basis.

Where the GST law provides a specific recovery framework for unpaid tax dues, criminal custody cannot be treated as the primary means of recovery at the bail stage. The HC noted that the statute contains express recovery mechanisms, including recovery proceedings after the prescribed period and recovery through the modes set out in the law, as well as recovery through the Magistrate as if it were a fine. In that statutory setting, the Court treated the criminal case as being used for dues recovery rather than as an independent basis for continued custody, and granted bail subject to usual conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail should be granted in a case arising out of alleged GST arrears, where the statute provides specific recovery mechanisms.

Analysis: The allegation was that substantial GST dues remained unrecovered and the FIR had been lodged after a long delay. The Court noted that the GST framework contains an express scheme for recovery of unpaid tax, including initiation of recovery proceedings after the prescribed period and recovery through the modes set out in the statute. The Court also referred to the provision enabling the proper officer to seek recovery through the Magistrate as if it were a fine. In that statutory setting, the Court found that the criminal case was being used in the context of recovery of dues rather than as an independent basis warranting continued custody.

Conclusion: Bail was granted to the applicant.

Final Conclusion: The applicant was ordered to be released on bail, subject to usual conditions, as the Court found a prima facie case for bail in view of the statutory recovery framework under the GST law.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a fiscal statute provides a specific and complete mechanism for recovery of tax dues, criminal prosecution or custody cannot be treated as the primary device for recovery when bail is considered.

---