Gopal Rathi Vs Ratan Banik (Calcutta High Court)
Summary: This case, Gopal Rathi vs. Ratan Banik, revolves around a bail application filed by Gopal Rathi under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). Rathi was arrested in connection with a case under the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017, for allegedly using fraudulent tax invoices to claim input tax credit (ITC) worth approximately Rs. 67 crores without any actual movement of goods. He had been in judicial custody for nearly 40 days at the time of the hearing. Rathi’s legal counsel, Mr. Singh, argued that the arrest was invalid because no prior notice was served under Section 35(3) of the BNSS, a requirement for offenses with a maximum punishment of up to five years. Mr. Singh asserted that the GST Act does not have a complete procedure for arrest, and thus, the provisions of the BNSS must be followed.
Mr. Banik, representing the Union of India, opposed the bail application, contending that the offense was economic in nature and should be treated with gravity. He argued that the Commissioner had sufficient grounds to believe Rathi committed the offense, making a separate notice unnecessary. He also cited a Supreme Court precedent to support the view that economic offenses warrant a strict approach. The court, after hearing both sides, noted that Rathi had consistently appeared in response to all summons. It was an undisputed fact that no notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS was served before his arrest. The court also observed that the determination of whether Rathi had indeed committed the fraud was a matter of evidence that could be resolved during the trial based on the documents already seized.
