Smti Trishna Barman vs. The Union Of INDIA And 2 Ors
Held
The Court allowed the prayer for impleadment. The State of Assam, represented by the State Tax GST Intelligence and Enforcement Unit, was impleaded as respondent No. 2, and the Superintendent of the State Tax GST Intelligence and Enforcement Unit was impleaded as respondent No. 3 in Bail Application No. 2217/2026. The petitioner was directed to file an amended cause title to reflect this change. The Interlocutory Application was disposed of accordingly. The reasoning behind the decision is that the impleadment was considered necessary or appropriate for the proper adjudication of the bail application, likely due to the involvement of State tax authorities in the underlying GST matter.
Facts
This matter concerns an Interlocutory Application (I.A.) filed before the Gauhati High Court. The petitioner, Smti Trishna Barman, sought to implead the State of Assam, represented by the State Tax GST Intelligence and Enforcement Unit, and the Superintendent of the same unit, as respondents in a pending Bail Application (B.A. No. 2217/2026). The original respondents in the Bail Application were the Union of India, represented by the Director General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). The application was filed to add the State tax authorities as parties to the bail proceedings. The petitioner is represented by Mr. J. I. Borbhuiya and Mr. G. G. Gogoi, while the respondents are represented by SC, GST and SC, SGST.
Key Issues
1. Whether the State of Assam, through its GST Intelligence and Enforcement Unit and its Superintendent, should be impleaded as respondents in the Bail Application (B.A. No. 2217/2026) filed by Smti Trishna Barman. This issue turns on the procedural requirements for impleading parties in a criminal bail application before the High Court. The petitioner argued for the impleadment of the State tax authorities. The judgment does not record any specific arguments from the respondents regarding the impleadment, other than their presence and representation.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010168192026
2026:GAU-AS:11290
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/808/2026 SMTI TRISHNA BARMAN D/O SATYA BARMAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ALAGJAR, P.O. P.S. BARAMA, DIST BAKSA, ASSAM - PIN 781346 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF GST INTELLIGENCE (DGGI), GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT, HOUSE NO. 77, WARD NO. 54, PANJABARI, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP (M), ASSAM. (REPRESENTED BY DY. SGI) 2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE STATE TAX GST INTELLIGENCE AND ENFORCEMENT UNIT OF ASSAM UNDER THE COMMISSIONERATE OF STATE OF TAX KAR BHAWAN GANESHGURI GUWAHATI-781006 3:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF STATE TAX GST INTELLIGENCE AND ENFORCEMENT UNIT KAR BHAWAN GANESHGURI GUWAHATI-781006 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. J I BORBHUIYA, G G GOGOI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST, SC, SGST
Page No.# 2/3 Linked Case : Bail Appln./2217/2026 SMTI TRISHNA BARMAN D/O SATYA BARMAN AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS RESIDENT OF VILLAGE ALAGJAR PO PS BARAMA DIST BAKSA ASSAM PIN 781346 VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENER
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Gauhati High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.