The Allahabad High Court modified a 2021 bail condition for a businessman facing Section 132 prosecution, replacing passport deposit and prior permission with advance written intimation to the trial court.
The Allahabad High Court has dispensed with the requirement that an accused in a GST prosecution deposit his passport and seek permission before each foreign trip, substituting a duty to inform the trial court 30 days in advance. [Amrinder Singh Alang v. Union of India, 2026-juristway.com-3152-HC(Allahabad)-GST]
Justice Vikram D. Chauhan modified condition no. 5 of the bail order dated 30 Jan 2021 passed by the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, in a case under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c) and 132(1)(i) of the CGST Act.
The applicant, a businessman, had deposited his passport and travelled abroad on five occasions with the court’s leave. He said that approaching the court each time hindered his business.
He relied on the Supreme Court’s order dated 2 Sep 2024 in Nikunj & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, which replaced a similar condition with prior intimation. The Supreme Court there observed that the purpose of bail conditions is to secure the accused’s participation in the trial, and that a permission requirement for each trip caused considerable prejudice to business.
The CGST department opposed the application but filed no counter affidavit despite time granted on 1 Sep, 21 Sep and 7 Oct 2026. The Court noted that the applicant had regularly approached the trial court and deposited his passport on each occasion.
The passport deposit was dispensed with. Before leaving India the applicant must inform the trial court of his travel schedule 30 days in advance, and must inform it in writing after returning. The application was disposed of.
2026-juristway.com-3152-HC(Allahabad)-GST
