Sahil Jain vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors

Held

In view of the statement made by the counsel for the respondents (Union of India) that the matter has been investigated and a complaint has been filed against the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed to withdraw the present petition. The Court allowed the petition as prayed for, which meant the petition was dismissed as withdrawn. No specific findings were made on the merits of the allegations or the representation, as the petition was withdrawn based on the statement of the respondents. The Court did not delve into the substantive issues raised by the petitioner regarding the fairness of the investigation or the protection of life and liberty, as the case concluded with the withdrawal.

Facts

The petitioner, Sahil Jain, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking directions for a fair and prompt investigation into a complaint filed against him by the Joint Commissioner (Preventive) of CGST Commissionerate, Ludhiana. The complaint pertains to alleged offenses under Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act, 2017, punishable under Section 132(1)(i). The petitioner also sought directions for the initiation of action on his representation dated 28.06.2021, for appropriate legal action against guilty officials, and for protection of his and his family's life and liberty from GST officials in Ludhiana. The respondents, including the Union of India, stated that the investigation was complete and a complaint had been filed against the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Court should direct the respondents to conduct a fair and prompt investigation into the complaint filed against the petitioner under Section 132(1)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act, 2017, punishable under Section 132(1)(i)? 2. Whether the Court should direct the respondents to initiate action on the petitioner's representation dated 28.06.2021, take legal action against guilty officials, and protect the petitioner's life and liberty? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner sought directions for a fair and prompt investigation, initiation of action on his representation, legal action against guilty officials, and protection of his and his family's life and liberty. Revenue's Arguments: The respondents (Union of India) stated that the investigation had been conducted and a complaint had already been filed against the petitioner before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana.