Section 132 of the CGST Act — Anticipatory Bail – The applicant sought pre-arrest bail in respect of the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, and under Sections 132(1)(e), (1)(f) and 132(1)(iv) of the Act. The counsel for the applicant submitted that the FIR was registered in the year 2019. The applicant attended the Investigation Officer on as many as four occasions and co-operated with the investigation. The case rests on documentary evidence and the custody of the applicant is not required. Once the special statute like GST has prescribed the punishment for the offence punishable under the said Act, the provisions of the IPC then cannot be invoked. He relied upon the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Deepak Kumar Vs. State of Punjab. The respondent counsel submitted that the applicant has not co-operated with the investigation. It is after the statement of the Chartered Accountant was recorded that the involvement of the present applicant came to light. The statement of the Chartered Accountant reveals that it is the applicant who had approached him for the work relating to the formation of the company. The court observed that this is not a fit case to grant relief of pre-arrest bail to the applicant. 

Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the anticipatory bail application.