Kaushal Kumar Mishra vs. Senior Intelligence Officer Dggi Ludhiana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Kaushal Kumar Mishra, sought anticipatory bail in an inquiry initiated under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner had joined the investigation multiple times and provided necessary documents to the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Ludhiana. The respondent, Senior Intelligence Officer, DGGI Ludhiana, stated that after completing the investigation, a show cause notice had been issued to the petitioner. Consequently, custodial interrogation was deemed unnecessary. However, the respondent reserved the right to prosecute the petitioner under Section 132 of the CGST Act.
Held
The Court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail. The reasoning was based on the submission by the respondent that the investigation was complete and the custodial interrogation of the petitioner was not required. The Court noted that a show cause notice had been issued to the petitioner. The interim bail granted earlier was made absolute, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The Court explicitly stated that it was not commenting on the merits of the case. The respondent department was granted liberty to prosecute the petitioner under Section 132 of the CGST Act. No issues were expressly left undecided.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in an inquiry under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017, given the completion of the investigation and the issuance of a show cause notice? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that he had fully cooperated with the investigation, joining it multiple times and providing all requested documents. Therefore, his custodial interrogation was not required, and anticipatory bail should be granted. Respondent's contention: The respondent stated that the investigation was complete and a show cause notice had been issued. They conceded that custodial interrogation was not required but reserved the right to prosecute the petitioner under Section 132 of the CGST Act.
Sections Cited
Section 132, Section 438(2)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CRM-M-21550-2021 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-21550-2021 (O&M) Date of decision : 9.2.2023 Kaushal Kumar Mishra ... Petitioner VERSUS Senior Intelligence Officer DGGI Ludhiana ... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KARAMJIT SINGH Present: Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Arun Biriwal, Advocate, for the respondent. *****
KARAMJIT SINGH, J. (Oral) Prayer is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in the inquiry under Section 132 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has joined the investigation with the concerned authorities multiple times and also provided all the requisite documents to the investigating agency. Today, learned senior standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, made statement that after completion of investigation, now show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner and as such, now custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. He further submits that, however, the case of the petitioner shall be considered separately for prosecution under Section 132 of CGST Act. In view of above, as the investigation already stands completed and the custody of the petitioner is not required by the respondent, without PARITOSH KUMAR 2023.02.10 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document
CRM-M-21550-2021 (O&M) 2 commenting on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and order of interim bail dated 1.6.2021 is hereby made absolute subject to the conditions enshrined under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Further, the respondent department is at liberty to prosecute the petitioner under Section 132 of CGST Act.
( KARAMJIT SINGH)
JUDGE February 9, 2023 Paritosh Kumar Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No PARITOSH KUMAR 2023.02.10 18:01 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this Judicial Record/Decree/Document
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.