Non-Bailable Warrant Can’t Be Issued Without Summons: Rajasthan
High Court Quashes Arrest Order Against P.C. Purohit in ₹2,000 Crore GST Case
Introduction
The criminal justice
system is governed not only by the substantive nature of the alleged offence
but also by procedural fairness. In the recent case of P.C. Purohit vs Union
of India, the Rajasthan High Court reiterated that non-bailable warrants
(NBWs) should not be issued as a first step unless the accused avoids
appearance despite summons or bailable warrants. The Court quashed the NBW
against the petitioner and allowed his appearance through bail bonds.
Case
Details
- Case Title:
P.C. Purohit vs Union of India
- Case No.:
S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 972/2025
- Neutral Citation No.:
2025:RJ-JP:11743
- Court:
Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
- Reserved On:
12 March 2025
- Pronounced On:
20 March 2025
Background
of the Case
The Directorate General
of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Jaipur Zonal Unit, received intelligence about a
major GST evasion operation allegedly involving fake packaging material
transactions under the name of different firms. The final destination of
goods was M/s Miraj Products Pvt. Ltd. in Nathdwara, Rajasthan.
Key
Allegations:
- A truck was found unloading material
at Miraj’s premises with invoices from M/s Shri Balaji
Enterprises, Ahmedabad, allegedly a bogus firm.
- M/s Montage Packaging was reportedly
issuing invoices in the names of shell companies to evade GST.
- The department initiated proceedings
and took cognizance against P.C. Purohit, among others, under Section
132(1)(a), (f), (h), (j), (k), and (l) of the CGST Act, 2017.
Petitioner’s
Plea
P.C. Purohit, aggrieved
by the issuance of non-bailable warrants (NBWs) on 03 August 2024 and
rejection of his application for conversion into bailable warrants on 31
January 2025, moved the High Court under Section 528 of BNSS, praying
for:
1. Quashing
of the NBWs
2. Permission
to appear and furnish bonds, without being treated as arrested
Key
Submissions by the Petitioner
1. Illegal Use of NBWs
Without Prior Summons
The petitioner argued
that the trial court issued NBWs without first issuing summons or bailable
warrants, which violates Sections 87, 88, and 204(5) CrPC. This was procedurally
incorrect and violated the standard norms of criminal law.
2. Full Cooperation with
Investigation
- The petitioner complied with
summons issued during the investigation.
- He appeared before the DGGI on 08.06.2022,
and his statement was recorded.
- There was no allegation of
absconding or evasion of the law.
3. No Prayer for Custody
in Complaint
Even the complaint
filed by the DGGI did not request custody of the petitioner,
indicating there was no reason for a coercive measure like NBW.
4. Reliance on Supreme
Court Judgments
- Tarsem Lal vs ED (2024)
– Custody cannot be sought merely because a complaint has been filed.
Arrests must follow summons and proper procedure.
- Vikas vs State of Rajasthan (2014) 3
SCC 321
- Inder Mohan Goswami vs State of
Uttaranchal (2007) 12 SCC 1 – Summons must
precede NBWs, barring exceptional cases.
Arguments
by the Union of India
The DGGI opposed the
petition, submitting that:
- The petitioner was involved in ₹2,000
crore GST evasion.
- The offence is economic and
serious, affecting national revenue.
- NBWs were justified
given the gravity of the allegations.
However, the department
did not dispute that:
- The petitioner had cooperated
earlier during investigation.
- The department had not sought his
arrest during the filing of the complaint.
Key Legal
Questions Before the Court
1. Can
NBWs be issued at the first instance after cognizance is taken?
2. Was
the accused avoiding the process of law or likely to tamper with evidence?
3. Should
the court accept bail bonds without requiring custody or regular bail?
Court's
Observations
1. Summons or Bailable
Warrants Should Precede NBWs
The Court reiterated the
settled law that NBWs must not be issued without first trying summons or
bailable warrants. The trial court failed to explain why summons were
inadequate.
“Issuing NBWs at the
first instance after cognizance for securing presence of an accused is not
sustainable.” — Rajasthan HC
2. No Allegation of
Absconding or Tampering
- The petitioner appeared before
authorities during investigation.
- No finding or cognizance
was taken for tampering or destruction of evidence.
- The petitioner gave assurance to
appear before the court.
3. Accused Should Not Be
Treated as in Custody
Referring to Tarsem
Lal, the Court held:
“When an accused appears
pursuant to summons, he is not in custody and need not apply for regular bail.”
4. Trial Court Ignored
Settled Law
The trial court dismissed
the petitioner’s application under Section 72(2) BNSS without considering:
- Legal precedent
- Absence of risk of absconding
- Willingness to cooperate
- Personal liberty under Article 21
of the Constitution
Final
Judgment
Orders Passed by
Rajasthan High Court:
1. The
order dated 31.01.2025 (rejecting conversion to bailable warrant) is quashed.
2. The
NBWs issued on 03.08.2024 are converted into bailable warrants.
3. The
petitioner shall appear before the trial court within one month and
submit bail bonds.
4. He
shall not be treated as in custody, and need not apply for regular
bail.
5. The
trial court may accept bail bonds under Section 88 CrPC to ensure
presence during the trial.
“Presumption of innocence
is a fundamental right; issuance of NBW must be a last resort.” — Rajasthan HC
Conclusion:
Due Process Trumps Departmental Discretion
The judgment in P.C.
Purohit vs Union of India reaffirms the importance of due process,
personal liberty, and structured enforcement under GST law. While the
offence may be serious, arbitrary issuance of non-bailable warrants
cannot substitute for lawful procedure.
This decision ensures
that economic offences under GST are prosecuted with fairness, balancing
state interest and individual rights.
Disclaimer: All the Information is based on the notification, circular and order issued by the Govt. authority and judgement delivered by the court or the authority information is strictly for educational purposes and on the basis of our best understanding of laws & not binding on anyone.
Find the Attachment (Press on Click Here )
Click here
