Shashi Kant Pandey vs. Directorate General Of GST Intelligence

Facts

These are three bail applications filed by Shashi Kant Pandey, Krishna Kant Pandey, and Laxmi Kant Pandey. The petitioners are seeking bail in connection with proceedings initiated by the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI). The learned senior counsel for the petitioners sought to withdraw the present petitions. This request was made in light of an interim protection order granted by the Supreme Court on October 18, 2023, in a related writ petition. The petitioners were granted liberty to approach the High Court again at a later stage if they deemed it necessary. A copy of the Supreme Court's order was presented to the Court and taken on record.

Held

The Court held that the present bail applications should be dismissed as withdrawn. This decision was based on the explicit request made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners. The withdrawal was necessitated by the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court on October 18, 2023, in a related matter. The Supreme Court's order provided the petitioners with the liberty to approach the High Court at a later stage if they so advised. The Court accepted the submission and accordingly dismissed the petitions as withdrawn, while preserving the petitioners' liberty to re-approach the court as per the Supreme Court's direction. No specific findings were made on the merits of the bail applications themselves, as the matter was disposed of on the procedural ground of withdrawal.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present bail applications should be dismissed as withdrawn in light of the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court and the petitioners' request to withdraw. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners, through their senior counsel, sought to withdraw the bail applications. They relied on the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court in W.P.(CRL)No. 497/2023, titled Sashi Kant Pandey Vs. Union of India, dated October 18, 2023. This order provided them with liberty to approach the Court at a later stage if advised. The petitioners argued that the current petitions should be dismissed as withdrawn based on this development and the liberty granted. Respondent's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondent (DGGI) on the withdrawal of the petitions. The respondent was represented by counsel, but their contentions regarding the withdrawal are not detailed in the provided text.