CBI arrests absconding CGST Additional Commissioner Vinay Kumar Kantheti in ₹40 lakh bribe case
Synopsis
A senior CGST official, Additional Commissioner Vinay Kumar Kantheti, chose to flee rather than comply with a Bombay High Court bail-cancellation order — and was tracked down in Rishikesh by the CBI. The ₹40 lakh bribery case, which saw a Special Court's bail order overturned by the High Court, exposes a high-ranking IRS officer's alleged role in extorting a Raigad-based firm.
Key Takeaways
CBI arrested Additional Commissioner of CGST, Vinay Kumar Kantheti (IRS, 2009 batch) from Rishikesh, Uttarakhand on 21 September 2026 .
Kantheti had been absconding since 16 September after the Bombay High Court cancelled his bail and ordered his surrender.
The case involves an alleged demand of ₹1.50 crore , reduced to ₹40 lakh , in connection with CGST proceedings against a Raigad, Maharashtra -based firm.
Co-accused Rakesh Kumar Sinha (Superintendent, CGST, Raigad) and conduit Narinder Rajput are already in 14 days of judicial custody .
The Bombay High Court overturned a Special CBI Court, Thane order that had declared the original arrests illegal and freed the accused on bail.
Case registered under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by CBI's Anti-Corruption Branch, Mumbai.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) arrested Additional Commissioner of CGST, Vinay Kumar Kantheti (IRS, 2009 batch) from Rishikesh, Uttarakhand on 21 September 2026, after he allegedly absconded following the Bombay High Court's order cancelling his bail and directing his surrender. The case stems from a ₹40 lakh bribe demand linked to GST proceedings against a company based in Raigad, Maharashtra.
Background: How the Bribe Case Unfolded
The CBI's Anti-Corruption Branch, Mumbai, registered the case on 26 August under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, following a complaint alleging that a Superintendent of CGST, Khandeshwar, Raigad, demanded illegal gratification in connection with proceedings against the complainant's firm. According to the CBI, the initial demand was ₹1.50 crore, which was subsequently negotiated down to ₹40 lakh.
The CBI laid a trap on 27 August, during which a private individual — reportedly acting as a Customs House Agent — was apprehended while allegedly accepting ₹40 lakh on behalf of Superintendent CGST Raigad, Rakesh Kumar Sinha, and Additional Commissioner Kantheti.
Legal Twists: Bail Cancelled, Accused Absconds
All three accused were produced before the Special CBI Court, Thane, which, via order dated 28 August, rejected the CBI's request for five days of police custody, declared the arrests illegal, and released the accused on bail. The CBI challenged this order before the Bombay High Court, which accepted the agency's plea, quashed the Special Court's order, and remanded the three accused to two days of CBI custody.
The High Court, after examining the record, found that grounds of arrest had been communicated to the accused in writing and that family members and advocates had been duly informed — effectively vindicating the CBI's arrest procedure.
Following this, Sinha and private conduit Narinder Rajput were taken into CBI custody and subsequently sent to 14 days of judicial custody. However, Kantheti chose to abscond rather than comply with the High Court's directive, remaining at large from 16 September until his arrest in Rishikesh.
The Conduit's Role
The third accused, Narinder Rajput, is described by the CBI as a private individual who reportedly served as a conduit between the complainant's firm and the CGST officials. Rajput is already in judicial custody along with Sinha. The use of a third-party intermediary in bribery cases involving tax officials is a pattern investigators have flagged repeatedly in anti-corruption proceedings.
What Happens Next
With Kantheti now in custody, the CBI is expected to seek custodial interrogation to establish the full chain of demand and acceptance in the bribery network. The case will proceed before the Special CBI Court, Thane. This arrest underscores the CBI's determination to enforce court directions even when accused officials attempt to evade judicial oversight.
Point of View
Regrettably, not rare — but the audacity of a senior IRS officer choosing to abscond rather than comply with a High Court order. That the Special Court first declared the CBI's arrests 'illegal' and freed the accused, only to be overruled by the High Court, also signals a troubling inconsistency in how anti-corruption arrests are being adjudicated at the trial level. The CBI's eventual success in tracing Kantheti to Rishikesh restores some institutional credibility, but questions remain about how a serving Additional Commissioner could evade custody for five days without institutional checks triggering an alert.
NationPress
21 Sept 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is Vinay Kumar Kantheti and why was he arrested?
Vinay Kumar Kantheti is an IRS officer of the 2009 batch serving as Additional Commissioner of CGST, Raigad. He was arrested by the CBI from Rishikesh on 21 September 2026 for allegedly demanding and accepting a ₹40 lakh bribe in connection with GST proceedings against a Maharashtra-based company.
Why had Kantheti absconded?
The Bombay High Court cancelled his bail on 16 September and directed him to surrender before the CBI. Instead of complying, Kantheti went into hiding and was traced to Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, where the CBI arrested him.
What was the original bribe demand in this case?
According to the CBI, the initial illegal gratification demanded was ₹1.50 crore, which was later reduced to ₹40 lakh. The demand was linked to proceedings against the complainant's firm before the CGST, Raigad.
Who are the other accused in the CGST bribe case?
The other two accused are Rakesh Kumar Sinha, Superintendent of CGST, Raigad, and Narinder Rajput, a private individual who allegedly acted as a conduit between the officials and the complainant. Both are currently in judicial custody.
How did the Bombay High Court get involved?
After the Special CBI Court, Thane declared the original arrests illegal and granted bail to the accused, the CBI challenged that order before the Bombay High Court. The High Court quashed the Special Court's order, found that arrest procedures had been followed correctly, and remanded the accused to two days of CBI custody.
