Abhishek Pathak Vs State of U.P. And 4 Others (Allahabad High Court)
In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court dismissed an application for transit anticipatory bail filed by Abhishek Pathak, proprietor of Samridhi Trading, in connection with a GST inquiry. Pathak, apprehending arrest following summons from the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), sought pre-arrest protection.
Pathak’s counsel argued that his client, a resident of Shahjahanpur, Uttar Pradesh, faced difficulty in approaching the competent court in Chhattisgarh to seek regular anticipatory bail. He contended that Samridhi Trading, based in Raipur, was alleged to be a non-existent firm, prompting the GST inquiry under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
However, the Court, after hearing submissions, found no merit in the application. It was noted that Pathak himself was not present in court for the hearing, with the application filed based solely on his instructions. The bench emphasized that the plea for pre-arrest bail should ordinarily be raised before the court with jurisdiction over the case.
Citing the Supreme Court’s decision in Priya Indoriya Vs. State of Karnataka and others (2024) 4 SCC 749, the Allahabad High Court reiterated that transit anticipatory bail is a concession granted only in “exceptional circumstances” where denial would cause prejudice to the accused. The Court clarified that such a concession cannot be granted routinely. Consequently, the application was dismissed without expressing an opinion on the merits of the ongoing GST inquiry.
