The Telangana High Court has granted bail to a person arrested in a case involving alleged offences under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017 AND observed that he had spent 60 days in judicial custody and that most of the investigation had been completed. In those circumstances, further detention would serve no purpose.
The bench of Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao passed the order in a bail petition against the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Hyderabad Zonal Unit.
Buy Now: Think Before You Pay Cash: 50+ Landmark Rulings on Section 40A(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961
The accused had been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on July 24, 2026. The case concerns alleged offences under Section 132(1)(c), read with Section 132(1)(i), and Section 132(5) of the CGST Act. The order does not set out the underlying transactions or the amount of tax allegedly involved.
Seeking bail under Sections 480 and 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, counsel for the accused submitted that the 60-day period had elapsed. He told the Court that the hearing fell on the 61st day of custody and sought the accused’s release.
Appearing for the DGGI, Senior Standing Counsel for the CBIC informed the Court that most of the investigation was complete and requested an appropriate order.
The High Court noted that the accused had remained in jail since July 24, 2026. It examined the remand application, which referred to offences punishable under Section 132 of the CGST Act and arrest under Section 69 of the Act.
Taking into account the completion of the 60-day period and the prosecution’s statement about the progress of the investigation, the Court held that continued judicial custody would serve no purpose. It accordingly allowed the bail petition.
The order grants bail on the facts before the Court. It does not decide whether the accused committed the alleged GST offences.
The Court directed the accused to execute a personal bond of ₹20,000 with two sureties for the same amount each, to the satisfaction of the Special Judge for Trial of Cases under Economic Offences at Hyderabad.
He must appear before the DGGI whenever called by notice, comply with the conditions referred to in Section 480(3) of the BNSS, and refrain from directly or indirectly influencing, threatening or inducing prosecution witnesses. The Court said the prosecution may seek cancellation of bail if any condition is violated.
Membership Required to Access Case Details & Order Copy
To view the complete Case Details and Download Order Copy, you must have an active membership. Please subscribe to continue.
