Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2020 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 109 - HC - GSTGrant of anticipatory bail - Jurisdiction of learned ASJ, Rohini to pass such order - it is contended that the jurisdiction lies with the learned ACMM and/or learned ASJ, Patiala House Court - HELD THAT - Now since the bail extended till 30.10.2020 is also expiring, hence the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition would in any case become infructuous and as such intends to withdraw the same but seeks a direction to the learned trial court that whenever a fresh application is moved, notice be issued to the department. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits he shall move an appropriate application before the learned Additional Session s Court to apprise him of his jurisdiction and to give notice to the petitioner/department. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Challenging jurisdiction of the court in granting anticipatory bail, absence of notice to the petitioner/department, extension of anticipatory bail without notice, withdrawal of petition seeking notice to department. Analysis: The judgment pertains to a challenge against a bail order granted by the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) of Rohini District Court. The petitioner contested that the ASJ of Rohini lacked jurisdiction to pass the bail order, asserting that the jurisdiction lies with the ACMM and/or ASJ of Patiala House Court. Moreover, it was argued that no notice was served to the petitioner/department during the issuance of the bail orders, even though the benefit granted had expired on a specific date. The anticipatory bail, originally granted to the respondents, was extended until a later date without any notice to the department. Consequently, the petitioner expressed the intention to withdraw the petition as the extended bail was nearing expiration, but sought a directive for the trial court to issue notice to the department upon the filing of a fresh application. The respondents' counsels objected to this request. The petitioner's counsel assured that an application would be filed before the Additional Sessions Court to clarify jurisdiction and ensure notice to the petitioner/department. Subsequently, the petition was disposed of based on the aforementioned submissions and actions proposed by the petitioner's counsel.
|