Sammy Dhiman vs. Directorate General Of GST Intelligence
Facts
The petitioner, Sammy Dhiman, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition (CRM-M No.53655 of 2019) before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The respondents were the Directorate General of GST Intelligence and the State of Punjab. The petition was filed against an unspecified order or action by the respondents. The procedural history indicates that the matter reached the High Court for adjudication. The amount in dispute, if any, is not recorded in the judgment.
Held
The Court held that since the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition and the respondents had no objection, the petition should be dismissed as withdrawn. The reasoning was based on the consent of all parties involved. The ratio decidendi is that a petition can be dismissed as withdrawn if the petitioner requests it and the respondents do not oppose the withdrawal. The operative direction was to dismiss the petition accordingly.
Key Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether the petitioner's request to withdraw the petition should be granted. The petitioner, through their counsel, sought permission to withdraw the instant petition at that stage. The respondents, represented by the Senior Standing counsel for CBIC and the State counsel, had no objection to the withdrawal. The Court had to decide whether to allow the withdrawal and consequently dismiss the petition.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.53655 of 2019 Date of Decision: 30th August, 2022. Sammy Dhiman ...Petitioner Versus Directorate General of GST Intelligence & Another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present: Mr. Tanvir Singh Grewal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Saurabh Goel, Advocate, Senior Standing counsel, CBIC with Ms. Samridhi Jain, Advocate, for respondent No.
Mr. Iqbal Singh Mann, DAG, Punjab, for respondent No.2. * * * MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA, J.
(ORAL)
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the instant petition, at this stage. Learned Senior Standing counsel for respondent No.1 as well as learned State counsel for respondent No.2 have no objection for the same. Resultantly, the petition in hand stands dismissed for having been withdrawn accordingly. (MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA) JUDGE 30.08.2022. seema Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes Whether Reportable? No SEEMA SHARMA 2022.08.31 12:47 I attest the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.