Court finds “brazen violation” of Article 21 and possible overreach of judicial proceedings after authorities detained petitioner through the day and showed arrest at 4:45 AM next morning
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered the interim release of a GST assessee after finding, at a prima facie stage, that his arrest by CGST authorities was in violation of Article 21 of the Constitution and appeared to overreach pending court proceedings.
A Division Bench of Chief Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor was hearing a writ petition filed by Kuldeep Goyal, Karta of an HUF running business under the name M/s Ansh Steel Alloys, challenging an arrest memo dated 24 September 2026 and an authorization for arrest dated 23 September 2026.
The case arose in the backdrop of earlier proceedings in which the High Court had already been seized of a dispute concerning GST action against the petitioner’s firm. On 22 September 2026, after the revenue alleged non-cooperation and the petitioner’s counsel disputed that claim, the Court directed the petitioner to appear before the authorities at 11:00 AM on 23 September 2026 and asked the department to report back on the status of the matter on 29 September 2026.
According to the petitioner, he appeared before the authorities as directed and furnished the documents sought. However, instead of informing the Court about the outcome, the authorities allegedly detained him throughout the day and night and formally showed his arrest at 4:45 AM the next morning.
The Court took serious exception to this sequence of events. It noted that the summons issued on 23 September 2026 required the petitioner’s appearance at 12:05 PM, even though he was already present before the authorities at 11:00 AM pursuant to the Court’s order. The Bench also pointed out that the DIN for the summons was generated at 12:07 PM, while the summons itself mentioned the earlier time of 12:05 PM, which prima facie suggested manipulation and undue haste.
The Bench observed that the authorization for arrest cited standard grounds such as preventing further offence, ensuring proper investigation, and preventing tampering with evidence. But in the circumstances of the case, the Court said these reasons appeared wholly misplaced because the petitioner was already before the authorities with records and was willing to cooperate under the Court’s directions. The authorization also made no reference to the pending writ proceedings or the Court’s order requiring appearance.
Describing the department’s conduct as a “brazen act of highhandedness,” the Court said the authorities should have apprised the Court of any developments rather than proceeding on their own when the matter was already pending and listed for further hearing. The Bench held that the manner in which the petitioner was detained and then arrested prima facie amounted to a violation of Article 21 and an attempt to overreach the Court.
The Court also noted that the petitioner had endorsed on the summons that he was appearing in compliance with the High Court’s order, yet the arrest papers did not mention this fact. The Bench found this omission significant and said it indicated a deliberate disregard of the judicial process.
In a strong response, the Court impleaded the Principal Commissioner, CGST, Ludhiana, and the arresting officer in their personal capacities and directed them to appear and explain their conduct. The Bench indicated that it was considering recommending disciplinary action against them.
As an immediate relief, the Court directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, to forthwith release the petitioner. However, it imposed conditions: the petitioner must surrender his passport, shall not leave the country without permission of the Court, and must inform the concerned Commissioner of Police before leaving the district, including his whereabouts and mobile number.
The Court clarified that the release was purely interim and would not be treated as any opinion on the merits of the GST proceedings pending against the petitioner.
Bottom Line :
GST - Arrest of assessee who appeared before authorities pursuant to High Court's order - Prima facie detention from 11:00 AM and formal arrest at 4:45 AM next morning, without apprising Court and ignoring pending proceedings, held to be brazen violation of Article 21 and an attempt to overreach the Court - Interim release directed and officers called upon to explain their conduct.
Statutory provision(s): Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Section 69 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017
Kuldeep Goyal v. Union of India, (Punjab And Haryana)(DB) : Law Finder Doc id # 2987143
