Vipin Shukla vs. Union Of INDIA And Ors

Held

The Court did not decide on the constitutionality of Sections 69 and 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, as this was not the effective relief pursued. Regarding the prayer to prevent coercive steps, the Court relied on a previous Division Bench judgment in CWP No.1393 of 2021 (Narinder Chugh Vs. Union of India & others). This precedent established that the appropriate remedy for such a relief is to file a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, before the competent criminal court, not a writ petition before the High Court. Therefore, the Court disposed of the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to pursue the remedy of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. The Court did not expressly leave any issue undecided, but rather directed the petitioner to the correct legal recourse.

Facts

The petitioner, Vipin Shukla, filed a writ petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking a declaration that Sections 69 and 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, are violative of Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution of India. However, the primary effective relief sought was to restrain the respondents from taking coercive steps against the petitioner. The respondents are the Union of India and others. The judgment does not specify the tax period or the amount in dispute. The procedural history relevant is that the petitioner approached the High Court directly with this writ petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether Sections 69 and 132 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, are violative of Articles 14, 20, and 21 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, is the appropriate forum to grant the relief of preventing coercive steps against the petitioner under the GST Act? Petitioner's arguments: The petitioner argued that Sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act are unconstitutional. The petitioner also sought a direction to prevent coercive action against him. Respondent's arguments: The respondents did not explicitly argue on the constitutionality of the sections. However, the Court noted a previous Division Bench decision in CWP No.1393 of 2021 (Narinder Chugh Vs. Union of India & others) which held that the appropriate remedy for seeking protection against coercive steps is to file a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, before the competent court.