NATWAR KUMAR JALAN v. THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS
WP(C)/6821/2024 · 2025-04-07
Arun Dev Choudhury
Writ Petition (Civil)body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22079 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 22079 (GAU) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010272492024
2025:GAU-AS:4321
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/6821/2024 NATWAR KUMAR JALAN S/O- LATE SHYAM SUNDAR JALAN, R/O- 21, 2ND FLOOR, JALANKUNJ, OPPOSITE RED CROSS SOCIETY, KEDAR ROAD, GUWAHATI, KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, PIN- 781007. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 2 ORS REPRESENTED BY DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX, INTELLIGENCE GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT, H/NO. 77, RUPKONWAR JYOTI PRASAD AGARWALA ROAD, PANJABARI, GHY-781027. 2:THE DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX INTELLIGENCE GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT H/NO. 77 RUPKONWAR JYOTI PRASAD AGARWALLA ROAD PANJABARI GHY-781027. 3:INTELLIGENCE OFFICER O/O- DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF GOODS AND SERVICES TAX INTELLIGENCE GUWAHATI ZONAL UNIT HOUSE NO. 27 PANJABARI GHY-27 Advocate for the Petitioner : DR. A SARAF, MR. A GOYAL,MR. A CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : SC, GST,
Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R
08.04.2025
1. Heard Dr. A Saraf, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. SC Keyal, learned standing counsel for GST. 2. This writ petition is directed against the proceedings initiated against the petitioner vide Case No. DGGI/INV/GST/3384/2024 under Section 132 (1)(C) of the Central Goods and Services Tax, (CGST) Act, 2017 as well as the subsequent arrest of the petitioner, who has been detained custody since 04.12.2024. 3. This court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties recorded that the allegation against the petitioner is that he has availed of input tax credit by without actual receipt of the good and thereby availed benefit of input tax credit by using false or forged bill and is therefore, guilty of the offences prescribed under Section 132 (1)(c) and therefore punishable under Clause (I) of the said section. 4. Thereafter, after elaborate discussion of provisions of law and the judgment cited at bar including sub-section 1 of Section 69 and the determinations made in Arnab Manoranjan Goswami vs State of Maharastra reported in AIR 2021 SC 1, Daulat Samirmal Mehta vs Union of India & Others, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine Bom 200 Division Bench and Sunil Kumar Jha vs Union of India & Ors. [WP(ST) No. 5484/2021], while issuing notice of motion passed the following orders on 18.12.2024:
“Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on interim bail subject to furnishing personal bond of Rs.
1 Lakh as well as execute a bail bond of Rs. 1 Lakh with two local sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) and the subject to following conditions: (1) That the accused-petitioner shall appear before the Investigating
Page No.# 3/3 Officer as and when required and co-operate with the investigation; (2) That the accused-petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to Court or to any police office or tamper with the evidence. He shall not, in any manner, try to influence or intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (3) That the accused-petitioner shall not obstruct the progress of the investigation/trial. And (4) That the accused-petitioner shall not misuse his liberty in any manner.”
5. It is submitted at the bar that already investigation has been completed and report has been submitted. This court has also not found any allegation of any violation of the conditions stipulated in the interim order dated 18.12.2024. 6. Therefore, in the fitness of things and as agreed to by the learned counsels for the parties, the present writ petition stands disposed of making the aforesaid interim order dated 18.12.2024 absolute. 7. It is needless to say that the present order and the order dated 18.12.2024, shall not be treated as a comment on the merit of the allegation of the GST authorities as well as on the merit of the contention raised by the writ petitioner in the present writ petition. 8. This disposes the writ petition JUDGE Comparing Assistant