Sushant Goel Vs Directorate General of GST Intelligence (Allahabad High Court)
The Allahabad High Court allowed a habeas corpus writ petition challenging the arrest, detention, and remand of the petitioner under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), and 132(1)(i) of the CGST Act. The petitioner sought release from custody and quashing of the remand order dated 01.11.2025 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut.
The petitioner argued that the mandatory requirements relating to arrest under the GST regime had not been followed. It was submitted that the grounds of arrest were not annexed to the arrest memo and no acknowledgment existed showing that the written grounds were furnished at the time of arrest. Reliance was placed on the Supreme Court decision in Radhika Agarwal v. Union of India, which required written grounds of arrest to be furnished as an annexure to the arrest memo. The petitioner further contended that the wife of the petitioner neither received the arrest memo nor signed it, and that the alleged intimation of arrest was received by post only on 08.11.2025.
The petitioner also argued that the grounds of arrest did not contain a mandatory Document Identification Number (DIN) as required by departmental circulars. It was contended that the grounds of arrest merely alleged that the petitioner was involved in a fake billing racket and fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit exceeding Rs.5 crore, but did not disclose the necessity of arrest or need for custodial interrogation as required under legal principles laid down in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
