The Supreme Court granted bail to Amit Mehra, holding that an undertrial cannot be kept in custody indefinitely, noting he spent over eight months in judicial custody without trial commencement. Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Alok Aradhe passed the order.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India directed the release of Amit Mehra on bail asserting that an undertrial cannot be held in custody indefinitely. The court highlighted that Mehra had been in judicial custody for over eight months, and the trial had yet to commence.
A Bench consisting of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice Alok Aradhe issued the order while hearing Mehra’s special leave petition, which challenged the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s rejection of his regular bail application in a case filed by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI).
Also Read: No GST on Hostels for Students: Supreme Court Says ‘Ultimate Use Is Residential’
The prosecution against Mehra involves alleged violations of Section 132(1)(b) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, Section 132(1)(i) of the GST Act, and Section 20(xv) of the IGST Act. While acknowledging the seriousness of the alleged offenses, the Court emphasized that the petitioner has been an undertrial for over eight months without the charges being framed.
The Bench noted that even if the trial were to start soon, it is improbable that it would conclude within the next year. Moreover, since the offenses are triable by a magistrate and carry a maximum punishment of up to five years, the Bench found that continued detention at this stage was unjustified.
Instructing that Mehra be released on bail under terms and conditions set by the trial court, the Bench stated that:
“In such circumstances, we are persuaded to exercise our discretion in favour of the petitioner,”
The Court Stated,
“We do not undermine the gravity of the alleged offence. However, at the same time, we should not overlook the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody as an under-trial prisoner past 8 months. The Trial Court is yet to commence. Charge is yet to be framed. Even if the trial commences in near future, it would not conclude within next one year. The offences are triable by Magistrate. The maximum punishment that the trial court may be in a position to impose upon the petitioner if held guilty would be upto 5 years.”
Also Read: GST Revision 2025: What Becomes Cheaper, What Gets Expensive? | Explained
The Court also indicated that if the GST department requires specific conditions to protect its interests, it may file an application with the trial court, which will review the request in accordance with the law.
Senior advocate PB Suresh represented the petitioner, supported by advocates Saurabh Kapoor, Mayank Jain, Madhur Jain and others. The Union of India was represented by Additional Solicitor General Raja Thakre, accompanied by advocates Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR.
With this order, the Supreme Court concluded the special leave petition and all related applications, allowing for the dasti of the order.
CASE TITLE: AMIT MEHRA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.20996/2025
Read Attachment: