Kamlesh Pandey vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Kamlesh Pandey, filed an application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita seeking pre-arrest bail. This was in apprehension of his arrest in connection with a summons dated May 19, 2026, issued by the Superintendent/Appraisal/Senior Intelligence Officer of the DGGI, Guwahati Zonal Unit. The summons was issued under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, in connection with case No. DGGI/INV/FUP/97/2024. The petitioner claimed innocence but expressed willingness to cooperate with the investigation and provide a clarification statement. The amount involved in the case exceeded five crores, making the offense non-bailable with a maximum punishment of five years imprisonment.
Held
The Court held that the application could be disposed of by directing the applicant to appear before the Superintendent/Appraisal/Senior Intelligence Officer. The Court granted interim pre-arrest bail subject to several conditions. The applicant was directed to appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 days and fully cooperate with the investigation. In the event of arrest, the respondent authorities were directed to produce the applicant before the competent court on the same day. If a regular bail application was filed, the concerned court was to consider and dispose of it on the same day. Until production and consideration of regular bail, the applicant was to be released on interim pre-arrest bail of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety. The interim protection was conditional upon the applicant cooperating with the investigation, not inducing or threatening anyone, not tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and not absconding. Failure to comply would result in the vacation of interim protection.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre-arrest bail in connection with the summons issued under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, given the non-bailable nature of the offense due to the amount involved exceeding five crores? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that he is innocent and not involved in the case. He expressed his readiness to cooperate with the investigation and appear before the Superintendent/Senior Intelligence Officer to provide a clarification statement, undertaking to comply with any conditions imposed by the Court. Revenue's Contention: The counsel for the respondent (Union of India and others) submitted that the purpose of the summons was to require the alleged tax evader/applicant to appear personally to clarify the allegations by giving a statement. The counsel raised no serious objection to granting interim bail, provided the applicant appeared before the Investigating Officer.
Sections Cited
Section 70, Section 482
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER 29.05.2026 Heard Mr. G. Gunia, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. O. Jerang, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. M. Kato, learned Dy.S.G.I for the respondent No.1 and Mr. T. Kipa, learned Standing Counsel, Central Excise and Customs for the respondent/1Nos. 2 & 3. 2. This application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita has been filed by the applicant seeking grant of pre-arrest bail, apprehending his arrest in connection with a summon dated 19.05.2026 issued by the Superintendent/Appraisal/Senior Intelligence Officer directing the applicant to appear before him in connection with the case vide No.DGGI/INV/FUP/97/2024 and CBIC-DIN-2026 05DEE 30000 333AA3, issued in exercise of power under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 3. It is submitted that, in the aforesaid case, since the amount involved exceeds five crores, the maximum punishment prescribed is imprisonment for five years and the offence is non-bailable; accordingly, the present pre-arrest application is being filed.
Mr. Gunia, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the present applicant is innocent and is not at all involved in the instant case. However, he submits that the applicant is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation and to appear before the Superintendent/Senior Intelligence Officer, and would like to give his clarification statement. He also undertakes to comply with any condition that may be imposed by this Court while granting
Page No.# 3/4 bail.
Mr. Kipa, learned Standing Counsel for Central Excise and Customs, fairly submits that the purpose of issuing the summons is that as the intelligence officer’s require the alleged tax evader/applicant to appear personally before it to clarify the allegation by giving statement. Therefore, he has not raise serious objection in granting interim bail provided the alleged offender appears before the IO.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the present application can be disposed of by directing the accused applicant to appear before the Superintendent/Appraisal/Senior Intelligence Officer.
Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of with the following directions: i. That the applicant shall appear before the Investigating Officer within 10 (ten) days from today and shall fully cooperate with the investigation in all aspect. ii. In the event of arrest of the applicant/alleged tax evader being sought, in connection with aforesaid case, the respondent authority shall produce/forward the applicant before the competent court on the same day. iii. On such production/appearance of the applicant, if any regular bail application is filed before the learned Court concerned, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the said Court on the same day in accordance with law. iv. Till the production before the competent court and Page No.# 4/4 consideration of regular bail, the applicant shall be released on interim pre-arrest bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting authority/concerned court.
The interim protection granted herein shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) that the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation as and when required; (ii) that he shall not induce, threaten, or promise any person acquainted with the facts of the case; (iii) that he shall not tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses in any manner; and (iv) that he shall not abscond or evade the process of law.
In the event of failure to comply with any of the aforesaid directions/conditions, the interim protection granted by this order shall stand automatically vacated/cancelled.
With the above observations and directions, the present bail application stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant
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.