Jignesh Vasudevbhai Prajapati vs. State Of Gujarat
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Jignesh Vasudevbhai Prajapati, engaged in powder coating and chemical trading, approached the High Court via a Special Criminal Application. He alleged that respondents No. 3 and 4, officers from the SOG (State of Gujarat), subjected him to high-handed treatment at their office. The petitioner claimed he was being coerced into admitting involvement in a syndicate that was defrauding businesses in other states. He asserted he had never engaged in illegal activities and was paying his taxes. The petitioner sought to restrain respondents No. 3 and 4 from taking coercive measures against him or forcing him to make payments related to alleged recoveries for Mac Organics Pvt. Ltd. and Fine Sekh Food Colour and Integrated. He also requested the return of a specific cheque.
Held
The Court held that it found no reason to interfere with the application and accordingly rejected it. The reasoning provided by the Court was that the petitioner has recourse to the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provides him with the right to seek advice from his advocate when approaching the office of the SOG. The Court implicitly suggested that the petitioner's grievances, if any, could be addressed through the established legal procedures available to him under criminal law, rather than through a writ petition seeking to restrain police action. The Court did not delve into the merits of the allegations regarding the coercive actions or the disputed payments, focusing instead on the procedural remedies available to the petitioner.
Key Issues
1. Whether the actions of respondents No. 3 and 4, officers of the SOG, in allegedly subjecting the petitioner to high-handed treatment and coercive steps to extract an admission of involvement in a syndicate and to force payment for alleged recoveries, constitute a violation of the petitioner's rights and warrant intervention by this Court? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the SOG officers were acting in a high-handed manner and using coercive tactics to force him to admit to being part of a syndicate and to make payments related to alleged recoveries. He maintained his innocence and stated he was engaged in legitimate business activities and paid his taxes. He sought protection from further coercive action and the return of a cheque. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments or contentions from the State or its representatives regarding the allegations made by the petitioner. The Court's reasoning implies a reliance on the procedural rights available to the petitioner under the Code of Criminal Procedure.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER Heard Mr. Tejas M. Barot, learned advocate for the applicant.
Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the petitioner is engaged in the business of powder coating of materials and runs the business in the name and style of SV Industries at Dantali, District Gandhinagar, and the said business was started by petitioner’s father Vasudevbhai Prajapati, 40 years back. Recently he was engaged in the business of trading of chemicals in the name and style of Chem India Pigments having office at Neel Gagan Plaza, Shahibaug, Ahmedabad, and owing to the pandemic, the proprietorship concern was shut down and the turn over of said Chem India Pigments before it was forced to surrender its GST registration was to the tune of Rs.3.00 crore per annum.
Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the R/SCR.A/7970/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/09/2021 petitioner has been paying taxes and duty in connection with the business activities undertaken by him. It is alleged that the petitioner has received calls from one Vijaysinh claiming to be a constable/writer from the office of SOG, operating from the office of Suptd. of Police, Ahmedabad (Rural), and after reaching the office of SOG, the petitioner was treated in high- handed manner by the respondents No.3 and 4, and it is stated by learned advocate Mr.Tejas Barot that the petitioner has never engaged in any illegal activity in connection with his business. It has been submitted by the learned advocate for the applicant that the coercive action of the police is to force the applicant to admit that he is part of syndicate with the persons who are duping members of business community of other States. The other details with regard to transaction undertaken by the petitioner has been noted in the petition.
The learned advocate for the applicant has prayed for relief to restrain the respondents No.3 and 4 – the officers of SOG operating from the Office of Suptd. of Police, Ahmedabad (Rural), from taking any coercive measure against the petitioner or forcing him to make any payment either by cash or any other mode in connection with the alleged recovery of sum due to Mac Organics Pvt. Ltd. And Fine Sekh Food Colour and Integrated. The further prayer is also made to direct the respondents No.3 and 4 to return the cheque bearing No.001624 of Account No. 08122000018804 of Kotak Mahindra Bank, Mithakhali Branch, Ahmedabad, to the petitioner.
The issue is with regard to payment of taxes. The allegation is that the officer of SOG in a high-handed manner are exercising coercive steps to get the admission from the petitioner. The Code of Criminal Procedure is available right to R/SCR.A/7970/2021 ORDER DATED: 02/09/2021 the petitioner and the petitioner can always take advice of his advocate while approaching the office of SOG. Thus this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the application; hence rejected. (GITA GOPI,J) A.M.A. SAIYED
Reproduced from the public record of the Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.