Jagdish Lal vs. Union Of INDIA And Anr

Held

The Court did not decide the substantive issues regarding the grant of anticipatory bail. Instead, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the present petition with the liberty to approach the competent court of jurisdiction. In view of this request, the High Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn, granting the petitioner the liberty to approach the appropriate court. No specific findings were made on the merits of the case or the alleged violation of statutory provisions. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition as withdrawn with liberty to approach the competent court.

Facts

The petitioner, Jagdish Lal, filed a petition under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana seeking anticipatory bail. The petition was filed in relation to a case under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner was also issued a summons dated March 31, 2021, by respondent No. 2, which he alleged was an attempt to illegally arrest him in violation of the statutory provisions of the CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner's counsel sought permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to approach the competent court of jurisdiction.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. in a case registered under Section 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the summons issued by respondent No. 2 was an attempt to illegally arrest him, violating the statutory provisions of the CGST Act, 2017, and therefore, he sought anticipatory bail. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (Union of India and another).