Inspector (Preventive) CGST Ludhiana vs. Sndeep Kumr Puri
Facts
The petitioner, an Inspector (Preventive) of Central Goods and Services Tax, Ludhiana, filed a petition before the High Court. The respondent, Sandeep Kumar Puri, had previously filed a criminal miscellaneous petition before a co-ordinate bench of the same High Court concerning a bail order. The petitioner brought to the court's notice the order dated 11.02.2022 passed in the respondent's earlier petition. In that prior order, the court had addressed the conditions for default bail granted to the respondent. The petitioner stated that due to the outcome of the earlier petition, the present petition had become infructuous.
Held
The Court held that the present petition has become infructuous. This decision was based on the fact that a co-ordinate bench of the High Court had already passed an order on 11.02.2022 in a related criminal miscellaneous petition filed by the same respondent, Sandeep Kumar Puri, concerning the same bail order. The earlier order had addressed and modified the bail conditions imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. The petitioner's counsel informed the court that the present petition was filed by the GST Inspector and that due to the disposal of the respondent's earlier petition, the current petition was rendered infructuous. The Court accepted this submission and disposed of the petition accordingly. No specific GST provisions were discussed or applied in this decision, as the matter was decided on procedural grounds of being infructuous.
Key Issues
1. Whether the present petition has become infructuous in light of the order passed by a co-ordinate bench in a related matter concerning the same respondent and the same bail order? The petitioner argued that the present petition has been rendered infructuous because a co-ordinate bench of the High Court has already dealt with the issue of bail conditions for the respondent in a previous petition (CRM-M-31525-2021). The petitioner stated that the earlier order addressed the same bail order and that the present petition, being related to the same matter, no longer requires adjudication. The revenue or State did not present any arguments in this specific judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CRM-M-34870-2021 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-34870-2021 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 18.02.2022 Inspector (Preventive), Central Goods and Services Tax, Ludhiana ...... Petitioner Versus Sandeep Kumar Puri
......... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present : Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** (Through video conferencing) PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) Learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this Court order dated 11.02.2022 passed by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-31525-2021 which was filed by Sandeep Kumar Puri (respondent in the present case). He further states that the issue relates to the same bail order. While disposing off the aforesaid criminal miscellaneous petition, this Court held that:- “8. Furthermore during the course of arguments being addressed in this petition, this Court had put to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as to, what reasonable condition can become imposed upon the petitioner, as a pre condition, for his becoming completely benefited from the indulgence of default bail as became accorded to him. The learned counsel for th
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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.