Directorate General Of GST Intelligence vs. Shri Nikit Mittal

Held

The Court noted that the original writ petition W.P.(Cr.) No. 14 of 2019 was disposed of with a direction for the writ petitioner to appear before the Senior Intelligence Officer as and when called upon, and that the Senior Intelligence Officer was directed not to arrest the writ petitioner on his first appearance, but to give him a fair opportunity of hearing. The Court posed a question to the Petitioner's counsel regarding the action taken by the Senior Intelligence Officer to secure the appearance of Shri Nikit Mittal, given his alleged non-appearance. The Petitioner's counsel stated they had no instruction on this matter and subsequently sought to withdraw the contempt case. Considering this submission, the Court dismissed the contempt case as withdrawn. The Court failed to understand the occasion for filing the contempt case instead of taking coercive measures to secure the litigant's appearance.

Facts

The Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Regional Unit, Jamshedpur (Petitioner) filed a contempt case against Shri Nikit Mittal (Opposite Party) for alleged willful and deliberate non-compliance of an order dated 23.04.2019 passed in W.P.(C) No. 14 of 2019. The original writ petition concerned a fraud of Rs. 400 crore. The order dated 23.04.2019 directed the writ petitioner (Shri Nikit Mittal) to appear before the Senior Intelligence Officer as and when called upon, and also directed the Senior Intelligence Officer not to arrest the writ petitioner on his first day of appearance, granting him a fair opportunity of hearing. The contempt case was filed because Shri Nikit Mittal allegedly did not appear before the Senior Intelligence Officer, thereby defying the writ court's order. The Petitioner sought initiation of contempt proceedings.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Petitioner's contempt case is maintainable when the Opposite Party (writ petitioner in the original writ petition) allegedly failed to appear before the Senior Intelligence Officer as directed by the writ court's order dated 23.04.2019, and what action the Senior Intelligence Officer took to secure his appearance. The Petitioner argued that the Opposite Party defied the order of the writ court by not appearing before the Senior Intelligence Officer, necessitating the contempt proceedings. They relied on a clarification in similar contempt cases (Cont. Case (Cvl) No. 665 of 2019) where it was held that coercive action, including arrest, could be taken if a party failed to appear after multiple summons. The Petitioner sought to dispose of the instant contempt case in terms of that order. The Opposite Party (represented by learned counsel) had no instruction regarding the actions taken by the Senior Intelligence Officer to secure the appearance of Shri Nikit Mittal. At a later stage, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that they may be allowed to withdraw the instant contempt case.