Regular bail granted where complaint was filed, the accused had no antecedents, and trial would be prolonged.

The applicant filed his first application for regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, after being arrested in Crime No. AD220526005259A of GST/2026, arising from a D.G.G.I. complaint concerning an offence under Section 69 of the GST Act.

The prosecution alleged that, after issuance of a GST-related show-cause notice, the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory response. On 3 April 2025, GST registration records, bank statements, money, computers and other equipment were seized, and approximately ₹5.46 crore was frozen.

The applicant had also filed WPC No. 3364 of 2025 before the High Court, which was pending. He was arrested on 1 June 2026 in Uttar Pradesh, brought to Raipur on transit remand, and thereafter remanded to custody.

The applicant contended that the case was based on insufficient material and that the ingredients of Section 69 of the GST Act were not made out. He further asserted that he had no criminal antecedents and had been in custody since 1 June 2026.

The non-applicant opposed bail, stating that the complaint had been filed against the applicant.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in connection with the GST prosecution under Section 69 of the GST Act?

2. Whether the filing of the complaint, the applicant’s period of custody, absence of criminal antecedents, and the likely delay in conclusion of trial justified his release on bail?

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which empowers the High Court to grant regular bail to a person accused of an offence and in custody.

The proceedings arose from an alleged offence under Section 69 of the GST Act.

In deciding bail, the Court considered the relevant circumstances, including the stage of the prosecution, filing of the complaint, length of custody, absence of criminal antecedents, and the likelihood that the trial would take time.

No separate judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order.

The Court considered the case diary and the submissions of both parties.

Although the prosecution opposed bail on the ground that a complaint had been filed, the Court noted that the complaint had already been submitted, the applicant had no criminal antecedents, and he had remained in custody since 1 June 2026.

Since the conclusion of the trial was likely to take considerable time, the Court found that continued detention was not warranted at the bail stage.

The Court therefore exercised its jurisdiction under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita in favour of the applicant.

It directed that Abhishek Pathak be released in connection with Crime No. AD220526005259A of GST/2026 upon furnishing a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with one solvent surety to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

The bail order was to remain in force until disposal of the case.