Ram Alias Raman Chaggar vs. Superintendent Of CGST Commissioner Ludhiana
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Ram @ Raman Chaggar, filed a petition before the High Court seeking interim bail. The petition arises from a complaint case filed by the Superintendent (Anti Evasion) of CGST Commissionerate, Ludhiana, on 18.11.2022. The complaint pertains to alleged offences under Sections 132(1)(B, C & L) of the CGST Act, 2017, and the Punjab State Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel argued that the petitioner's medical condition is serious and the existing medical report is inadequate. The respondent accepted notice, stating the complaint is before the learned Magistrate and the case is pending for 17.01.2023.
Held
The High Court disposed of the petition with a direction to the learned Magistrate. The Court directed the Magistrate to appreciate the arguments raised by the petitioner, particularly concerning his alleged serious medical condition and the need for examination at PGI. The Magistrate was instructed to seek a report from the Jail Authority and, if warranted, direct the petitioner's examination at PGI. The Court further emphasized ensuring that the petitioner is provided with the requisite medical treatment. The specific question of granting interim bail was not directly decided by the High Court but was remitted to the Magistrate for consideration in light of the medical condition.
Key Issues
1. Whether the learned Magistrate should consider the petitioner's alleged serious medical condition in granting interim bail, considering the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017, and the Punjab State Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017, relating to offences and bail. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner's medical condition is serious, and the medical report filed is not proper, necessitating proper examination and treatment, which may warrant interim bail. Respondent's contention: The complaint has been filed before the learned Magistrate, a medical report was sought, and the case is pending before the Magistrate for consideration on 17.01.2023.
Sections Cited
Section 132(1)(B), Section 132(1)(C), Section 132(1)(L), Section 132(1)(I), Section 20
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
215 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-1103-2023 Date of Decision: 13.01.2023 Ram @ Raman Chaggar ..... Petitioner Versus Superintendent (Anti Evasion) of CGST Commissionerate, Ludhiana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Gagan Oberoi, Advocate, for the petitioner. Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL) Prayer in the present petition is for grant of interim bail to the petitioner in a complaint case dated 18.11.2022 bearing No.COMA-92015-2022 in case titled Superintendent (Anti-Evasion) vs. Ram @ Raman Chaggar, for the offence under Sections 132(1) (B, C & L) punishable under Sections 132(1)(I) of CGST Act, 2017 and under Clauses (B), (C) & (L) of sub Section (1) of Section 132 of Punjab State Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 both read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the complaint is filed before the learned Magistrate and the medical report is also sought, however, the condition of the petitioner is serious and the medical report filed is not proper. Notice of motion. Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and submits that the complaint is filed before the learned Magistrate and the medical report was also sought and the case is pending consideration for 17.01.2023. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Magistrate concerned to appreciate the SHARMILA DEVI 2023.01.13 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-1103-2023 -2- arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties especially the petitioner, who has alleged that the medical condition of the petitioner is serious and he needs to be examined in PGI. The learned Magistrate would seek report from the Jail Authority and if so warranted, he would direct the petitioner to be examined in PGI as well and ensure that the petitioner is provided the requisite treatment. Disposed of in above terms. (RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 13.01.2023 JUDGE sharmila Whether Speaking/Reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No SHARMILA DEVI 2023.01.13 16:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this 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.