Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of GST Arrest & Summons Provisions; BNSS/CrPC Safeguards Extended to GST & Customs Arrests
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the constitutional validity of Sections 69 and 70 of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act, which grant the authorities powers of arrest and summons. The judgment was delivered in the case of Radhika Agarwal v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P.(Crl.) No. 336/2018), where the petitioners contended that Parliament lacked the legislative competence under Article 246-A to criminalize GST violations. However, the bench, led by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, ruled that Article 246-A, being a special provision, empowers Parliament to legislate on all aspects of GST, including enforcement mechanisms.
CrPC and BNSS Safeguards Applied to GST & Customs Arrests
The Supreme Court further ruled that the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), now replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), concerning the rights of accused persons, apply to arrests made under the GST and Customs Acts. This decision extends the principles laid down in the Arvind Kejriwal judgment, reinforcing that arrests under these Acts must be based on "reasons to believe" as mandated by law.
The Court clarified that anticipatory bail remains available for offenses under these Acts and directed strict adherence to departmental circulars regarding arrests. Additionally, it dismissed the argument that customs officers should be considered police officers, thereby reinforcing that their investigative powers remain distinct.
Protection Against Coercion and Judicial Oversight
Acknowledging complaints of coercive actions by tax officials, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that taxpayers who experience undue pressure have the right to seek relief through writ petitions. The Court also emphasized that the D.K. Basu guidelines on arrest procedures must be followed by customs officers, ensuring that arrestees are properly identified and that their families are promptly informed.
Concurring Judgment by Justice Bela Trivedi
In a concurring judgment, Justice Bela Trivedi highlighted that judicial review of arrests is limited to cases where mala fide action or statutory breaches are evident. She underscored that courts should not assess the adequacy of evidence at the time of arrest but should ensure compliance with statutory safeguards. The judgment also warned against the misuse of ambiguous arrest provisions to harass citizens, emphasizing that enforcement officers must possess verifiable material before proceeding with arrests.
Conclusion
The Hon’ble Supreme Court by this ruling has balanced the need for tax enforcement with the protection of individual rights against arbitrary action.