Page 88 - GSTL_23rd July 2020_Vol 38_Part 4

454 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 38
either reject the application forthwith or issue an interim order for the grant
of anticipatory bail.”
16. On bare reading of Section 69(1) of the CGST Act, where the Com-
missioner has reasons to believe if a person committed the offence under Section
132 of the CGST Act, he may, by order, authorize any officer of central tax to ar-
rest such person. Therefore, the petitioner has reasons to believe that he may be
arrested on accusation for having committed non-bailable offence under sub-
section (5) of Section 132 of the CGST Act. Therefore, the petition under Section
438 of the Cr.P.C. is maintainable for the offences committed under the CGST Act
and there is no statutory bar for invoking or exercising power under Section 438
of the Cr.P.C. for the offence committed under the provisions of the CGST Act.
Therefore, the contention of the Learned Special Public Prosecutor cannot be ac-
cepted.
17. On merits of the case, it is alleged by the prosecution that the peti-
tioner is said to have involved fraudulent involvement of input tax credit on the
basis of invoices without actual supply of goods in contravention of Section 16 of
the CGST Act and caused loss to the exchequer for Rs. 9.05 crore approximately.
It is also stated that the preliminary stage of investigation has been completed
and they found, the input tax credit taken by the petitioner from the bogus enti-
ties and said to be created fake invoices in order to avail input tax credit and to
make enquiry under Section 70 of the CGST Act. Therefore, summons have been
issued by the authorized officer under Section 70 of the CGST Act which clearly
goes to show that the petitioner is reasoned to believe that he is apprehending
his arrest in the hands of the respondent in case after his appearance before the
authorizing officer as per Section 69 of the CGST Act. Therefore, in case the peti-
tioner is arrested, he is likely to remand to the judicial custody, after his produc-
tion before the Magistrate and by looking to the present COVID-19 situation, if
he is remanded to the judicial custody, he will be put to hardship and definitely,
his health would likely to affect. The offences are not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life. There is no statutory bar in the CGST Act for granting an-
ticipatory bail by exercising power under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. Merely, there
were number of notices/summons issued by the respondent during the lock-
down for COVID-19 that itself is not a ground to reject the bail petition. Consid-
ering the fact and circumstances of the case, if an anticipatory bail is granted, no
prejudice would be caused to the respondent. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the
following :
ORDER
18. Petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be enlarged on bail in
the event of his arrest under Section 69 of the CGST Act by the respondent-
Authorised Officer, after enquiry under Section 70 of the CGST Act, in summon
dated 12-5-2020 in No. CBIC-DIN-202005DSS000006QFF52 and corrigendum
dated 18-5-2020 in No.CBIC-DIN-202005DSS000001W4CCE, subject to following
conditions :
(i) Petitioner shall execute a personal bond for Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees
Ten lakh) with two sureties to the Apprehending Authority or Au-
thorized Officer;
(ii) Petitioner shall appear before the Authorized Officer within one
week, after receipt of this order, for the purpose of enquiry under
Section 70 of the CGST Act;

GST LAW TIMES  23rd July 2020  88