Pankaj Khandelwal S/O Late Sh. Santosh Khandelwal vs. Union Of INDIA

Facts

The petitioner, Pankaj Khandelwal, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the Rajasthan High Court, seeking to quash a file registered by the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (DGGI), Jaipur Zonal Unit. This file was initiated for an alleged offence punishable under Section 132(1) of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel, Mr. H.C. Ganeshia, narrowed the prayer to a direction for the Investigating Officer to consider the petitioner's version and submitted documents. The respondent, Union of India, through its counsel Mr. R.D. Rastogi, Additional Solicitor General, fairly submitted that the Investigating Officer would duly consider the petitioner's defence and documents if presented.

Held

The Court ordered that the petition be disposed of in terms of the statement made by the Additional Solicitor General of India appearing for the respondent. This means the Investigating Officer is directed to consider the petitioner's defence and documents. The Court did not quash the investigation itself but ensured the petitioner's submissions would be taken into account. The ratio decidendi is that when a fair submission is made by the revenue that the petitioner's defence and documents will be considered, the High Court, in its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can dispose of the petition on that basis, without delving into the merits of the investigation. The operative direction is to dispose of the petition as per the respondent's statement.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Investigating Officer should be directed to consider the petitioner's version and submitted documents in relation to the investigation initiated under Section 132(1) of the CGST Act, 2017? The petitioner argued that the Investigating Officer should be directed to take into consideration the version of the petitioner, along with the documents to be submitted by the petitioner. The respondent (Union of India) argued that in case the petitioner appears before the Investigating Officer, projects his defence, and produces his documents, the same shall be duly considered by the Investigating Officer before submission of the report of the investigation along with his opinion. No other arguments were recorded for either side.