Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a bail application filed by Mohammed Kamran, who was accused of committing offences under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Service Tax Intelligence, challenged the High Court's decision to grant bail to Kamran, arguing that it was done without affording the appellant a fair opportunity to present its case. The appellant contended that the High Court erroneously recorded the presence of its counsel, who was actually unavailable, and that the bail application was heard hastily during the winter vacation. The respondent was arrested on 16th September 2025, and his successive bail applications were rejected by the trial court. After filing a criminal petition for bail in the High Court, the petition was listed for hearing during the winter vacation, leading to the grant of bail on 26th December 2025. The appellant argued that the respondent had engaged in forum shopping and suppressed material facts from the court. The Supreme Court noted the procedural irregularities and the respondent's conduct in pursuing parallel remedies without adequate disclosure. Ultimately, the Court decided to set aside the part of the High Court's order granting bail and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, allowing the appellant to file a counter affidavit and the respondent to file a rejoinder. The interim bail was to remain operative until further orders were made by the Single Judge.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Bail - Grant of Bail - Procedural Irregularities - Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, Section 135 - The High Court granted bail to the respondent without allowing the appellant sufficient opportunity to present its case, violating principles of natural justice. The Supreme Court held that the matter should be remitted for fresh consideration by the Single Judge (Paras 29-30).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in granting bail without affording the appellant an adequate opportunity to present its case.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the part of the High Court's order granting bail and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, allowing the appellant to file a counter affidavit and the respondent to file a rejoinder, with interim bail remaining operative until further orders.
Law Points
- bail
- natural justice
- abuse of process
- interim bail
- procedural irregularities
