VARUN GOYAL Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. A. Saraf, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam and Standing Counsel, Finance and Taxation Department.

(2.) The present application has been filed under Sec. 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 for setting aside and quashing the complaint dtd. 10/6/2025, Arrest Memo dtd. 10/6/2025, Grounds of Arrest dtd. 10/6/2025, Authorization to arrest dtd. 10/6/2025, Order dtd. 10/6/2025, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Kamrup (M), Guwahati in Case No. CT/ENF/AREST/2025/01; and the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under S. 132(1)(b) and S. 132 (1)(C) of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; along with a prayer to release the accused/petitioner, namely Shri Varun Goyal, on bail, who has been in custody since 10/6/2025, which in violation of the provisions of Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

(3.) It is submitted by Dr. Saraf, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, that the petitioner was arrested on 10/6/2025 in connection with the aforementioned case, allegedly without proper authorization for arrest and without being informed of the specific reasons for the arrest or the necessity thereof and thus, the arrest of the present petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and not sustainable in the eye of law and hence, the petitioner is liable to be enlarged on bail forthwith. He further submitted that the respondent No. 3 had filed a complaint against the petitioner before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M), Guwahati under Sec. 132(1)(b) and 132 (1)(C) of the Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'AGST Act, 2017' or 'Act of 2017') praying for judicial custody of the petitioner in connection with Case No. CT/EFN/AREST/2025/01 under Sec. 132 of 132(1)(C) of AGST Act, 2017 with the allegation that the petitioner's firm has been passing ineligible Input Tax Credit (in short 'ITC') on the strength of invoices without actual supply of goods. Since the petitioner is the proprietor of the said firm, he has been arrested in connection with this case. It is also pointed out that on the same day, the respondent No. 2 issued an authorization of arrest to the respondent No. 3 to arrest the petitioner. However, it is alleged that such authorization was issued without assigning any reasons or recording the grounds of arrest, thereby further vitiating the legality of the arrest.