Union of India Vs Sunil Biyani (Supreme Court of India)
The Supreme Court considered the Union of India’s appeal against the Bombay High Court order dated 13 February 2026, which rejected Sunil Biyani’s application for pre-arrest bail but granted him protection from arrest for one week from intimation of an order under Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act). The Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Mumbai Zonal Unit, was investigating Alphaneon Techsolutions Pvt. Ltd. and its group entities concerning alleged wrongful availment and passing of Input Tax Credit, circular invoicing and non-payment of GST on import of services. During inspection, Biyani was present at the registered premises. The Department issued three summonses under Section 70 of the CGST Act, but he sought adjournments and subsequently applied for anticipatory bail before the Sessions Court, which rejected it on 14 October 2025. He then approached the High Court and, pursuant to its interim directions, appeared before the Department and had his statement recorded. The Department informed the High Court that no Section 69 order had been passed because the investigation remained at an early stage and material facts were being verified. The High Court held that, absent a Section 69 order, there could be no apprehension of arrest and therefore an anticipatory bail application could not be entertained, but nevertheless granted temporary arrest protection.
