The Supreme Court has held that order under Section 69 of the CGST Act, 2017, needs to be communicated to the person who is sought to be arrested, before his arrest. According to the Court, since order under Section 69 is a sine qua non to seek anticipatory bail, the order needs to be communicated before arrest. The Apex Court in this regard noted the following:
-
Communication of the order would not obstruct the investigation ensued by the Department.
-
Communication will reinforce the right of the accused to seek anticipatory bail and to challenge the order and the ‘reason to believe’.
-
Withholding reasons from the accused could have drastic consequences on his right to liberty.
Further, according to the Supreme Court, the order may be communicated through electronic means in addition to the mode, as permitted under the BNSS, as well as all other permissible modes of communication.
Also, the Supreme Court in the case Union of India v. Sunil Biyani reiterated that while dismissing a petition seeking pre-arrest bail on the ground that the same is not maintainable, the High Court or the sessions court cannot grant protection in the nature of interim relief that could be granted during the pendency of the application.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
