Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Anticipatory Bail —–The petitioner prayed for anticipatory bail under Sections 132(1) (b), 132 (1) (i). The counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated. The Proprietor of the firm was found involved in illegal activities of passing fraudulent ITC by generating fake firms without there being any actual supply of goods and services. He was arrested and during the course of investigation the name of the applicant was allegedly taken by him. The role of the applicant was primarily of coordinating with various parties over the phone and he has never been consciously involved in any illegal activities of passing of fraudulent ITC. The applicant has never received any money from any of the suppliers or buyers of the firms. The main accused has been granted default bail from the Sessions Court, Meerut. The court observed that that co-accused was arrested and the name of the applicant has surfaced in his statement. Thus the applicant has facilitated the claim of fraudulent ITC by co accused. The instant matter is pertaining to large evasion of tax and to investigate the matter in depth the possibility of custodial interrogation of the applicant could not be ruled out. It does not appear to be a fit case where anticipatory bail may be granted to the applicant.

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court rejected the anticipatory bail. The applicant may move an appropriate regular bail application before the appropriate Court and if such an application is moved by the applicant within reasonable time the trial court shall be under an obligation to dispose of the same after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties, strictly in accordance with law, with expedition.