Anticipatory bail in GST fraud allegations set aside where custodial interrogation was found necessary to secure records and ascertain truth.

Anticipatory bail in a prosecution arising from summons under Section 70 of the Chhattisgarh GST Act for an offence under Section 132 was found unjustified on the facts. The Court noted allegations of suspicious transactions, dealings with multiple high-risk suppliers, and fraudulent input tax credit without actual supply of goods, with books and related records being relevant to the inquiry. In view of the need to ascertain the truth and secure the necessary documents, custodial interrogation was held necessary. The respondent's custody in another case was also noted. The pre-arrest bail order was set aside, the respondent was directed to be taken into custody in the present case, and the remedy of regular bail was left open.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail granted in relation to summons issued under Section 70 of the Chhattisgarh State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for an offence under Section 132 of that Act, was justified on the facts of the case.

Analysis: The allegation involved suspicious transactions with multiple high-risk suppliers and alleged availing of fraudulent input tax credit without actual supply of goods, with books of account and related records stated to be relevant. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, and for the purpose of ascertaining the truth and securing the necessary documents, custodial interrogation was considered necessary. The fact that the respondent was already in custody in another case was also noticed.

Conclusion: The grant of anticipatory bail was not justified and the order granting pre-arrest bail was set aside. The respondent was directed to be taken into custody in the present case, while leaving open the remedy of regular bail.

---