Majida Khatun And 2 Ors. vs. The State Of Assam
Held
The Court observed there was no immediate apprehension of arrest and directed the petitioners to appear before the Investigating Authority by a specified date to cooperate. It clarified that arrest under Section 69 of the GST Act requires prior communication of the order as per Apex Court judgment.
Facts
The petitioners filed an anticipatory bail application apprehending arrest under the GST Act, having received a notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, 2023.
Key Issues
Whether the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail due to apprehension of arrest under the GST Act, and the procedural requirements for arrest under Section 69 of the GST Act.
Sections Cited
Section 35(3) (BNSS, 2023), Section 69 (GST Act)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
Date : 28.08.2026
Heard Mr. S.M. Mollah, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Choudhury, learned Special Counsel for the GST. The instruction produced by the learned counsel for the GST does not reflect any immediate apprehension of arrest of the petitioners. It is submitted that, in the event of such requirement of arrest, the s
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.