Case Summary

• Habeas corpus writ petition filed by Jai Kumar Aggarwal against Directorate General of GST Intelligence and others for production and release from detention, declaring arrest and remand unconstitutional due to non-provision of grounds of arrest and reasons to believe. (!) (!) (!) (!)

Facts

• Officers conducted search at petitioner's premises on 29.12.2025 under Section 67 of CGST Act; petitioner arrested on 16.01.2026 under Section 69.[3]
• Arrest memo handed over at 6:40 p.m. on 16.01.2026 without annexures; no grounds of arrest or reasons to believe provided at time of arrest.[4]
• Remand order passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut on 17.01.2026 in Case No. 1361/2025 under Section 132(1)(c). (!) [9]

Petitioner's Arguments

• Arrest violated mandatory requirements under Section 69 CGST Act for furnishing grounds of arrest and reasons to believe.[4]
• No special reasons justifying arrest per departmental circular guidelines on conditions precedent, such as need for custodial investigation or risk of tampering.[5] (!) (!) (!) [6]
• Offence punishable up to 5 years; arrest unwarranted without justification.[4]
• Grounds of arrest, medical report served post-remand on 17.01.2026; signatures taken in custody without actual supply.[9][25][27]

Respondents' Arguments

• Reasons to believe are internal to Commissioner; not required to be supplied to arrestee under Section 69(1).[11][12][13]
• Grounds of arrest served on 16.01.2026 with signatures; compliance achieved before production.[17][24]
• CGST Act is complete code; arrest procedure followed.[16]

Court's Findings and Holdings

• Writ maintainable; if remand order illegal due to procedural non-compliance, habeas corpus lies and arrest becomes unlawful.[18]
• Reasons to believe must be recorded by Commissioner based on credible material but need not be supplied to arrestee.[19][20] (!) (!) [21]
• Grounds of arrest must be explained orally and furnished in writing as annexure to arrest memo per departmental instructions; no annexure in arrest memo here, indicating non-compliance.[26] (!)
• Arrest questionable for offence punishable below 7 years absent specific justification.[23]
• Remand order lacks recital of timely supply of grounds of arrest before production; factual dispute on service resolves against respondents; order suffers legal infirmity.[25][27][28]
• Remand order set aside; petitioner released forthwith; respondents may proceed afresh if warranted.[28][29][30][31]