Deep Suresh Ghadecha vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court held that the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable, even if the corpus is in judicial custody, as the court has the power under Article 226 to examine if personal liberty has been deprived without following the procedure established by law, which is a violation of Article 21. The Court found that the satisfaction recorded by the Joint Commissioner regarding having 'reasons to believe' that the corpus had committed an offence under the Act was without any authority of law and of no consequence. Consequently, the first requirement of Section 69(1) of the Act, a condition precedent for ordering an arrest, was not satisfied. The arrest of Sureshbhai Ugarchand Gadhecha was therefore held to be without authority of law and illegal, constituting a deprivation of personal liberty in violation of Article 21. The Court did not examine whether the corpus had committed any offence under the Act, deeming it beyond the scope of the petition. The Court directed that the corpus be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other offence, reserving liberty to the State authorities to take action in accordance with law, without prejudice to the rights of the corpus.

Facts

The petitioner, Deep Suresh Gadhecha, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of habeas corpus for his father, Sureshbhai Ugarchand Gadhecha. The petitioner contended that his father's arrest on December 6, 2019, by the State Tax Officer-3, Enforcement, DIV-2, Ahmedabad, was without authority of law and violated Article 21 of the Constitution. The arrest was made under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petition was filed and heard on the same day, with the Court issuing notice and directing the respondents to produce specific documents related to the authorization and deliberation process for the arrest. The corpus was lodged in the Central Jail, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petition for a writ of habeas corpus is maintainable when the corpus is in judicial custody and bail has not been sought or rejected by lower courts, particularly concerning alleged violations of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the procedure established by law under the GST Acts? 2. Whether the arrest of Sureshbhai Ugarchand Gadhecha by the State Tax Officer-3 was made in accordance with the provisions of Section 69 of the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, specifically regarding the requirement of the Commissioner or designated statutory authority having 'reasons to believe' that an offence has been committed, and whether this satisfaction was properly applied? Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner argued that the arrest was made without following the procedure established by law, violating Article 21. They contended that Section 69 of the GST Acts authorizes the Commissioner to delegate powers for arrest, but the decision to arrest must be taken by the designated statutory authority and cannot be delegated. The arrest memo and grounds of arrest did not disclose any contemplation or deliberation by the designated statutory authority, rendering the arrest illegal. They relied on the principle that deprivation of liberty without due process is violative of Article 21 and cited the case of Hansaben W/o. Ishwarbhai Dahyabhai Patani. Revenue's Arguments: The State relied on the affidavit in reply, detailing the perceived illegalities committed by the corpus. They placed heavy reliance on the decision of the Telangana High Court in P.V. Ramana Reddy (supra).