9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 598X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vijay Sajnani - it is also directed that the proceedings be video-graphed. Petition disposed off. - WRIT PETITION NO. 3022 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 20-8-2019 - RANJIT MORE AND N. J. JAMADAR, JJ. Dr. Sujay Kantawala i/b. Mr.Sebin M. Joseph, advocate for petitioner. Mr. J. B. Mishra, advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2., Mr. F. R. Shaikh, APP for the State. ORDER P. C. : Dr. Kantawala, learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that he does not wish to press the relief claimed in prayer clause (a) and, accordingly, he seeks leave to delete the said prayer. Leave as prayed for, is granted. Necessary amendment shall be carried fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the aforesaid order. 7. We have carefully perused the judgments/orders placed before us. In Birendra Kumar Pandey Anr.(Supra) , the petitioners were served with notice under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1961, to appear before the customs authority for interrogation in connection with certain matters and they were apprehensive that coercive attempts may be used to extort confessions from them and therefore, they prayed for the interrogation in presence of lawyer within a visible but beyond hearing distance. The Apex Court, after making reference to the Three judges Bench in case of Poolpandi and Others V/s. Superintendent, Central Excise and Others (1992) 3 SCC 259 and the subsequent judgment in case of Directo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used in the interrogation. The relief that was sought for, therefore, came to be granted in favour of the petitioners. 8. We have also referred to the judgment of the Telangana High Court wherein the petitioners have challenged the summons issued by the Superintendent (Anti-Evasion) of the Hyderabad GST Commissionerate under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioners claimed protection from arrest and the Telangana High Court dismissed the petition along with connected petitions as it did not find favour with the petitioners and the Telangana High Court after making reference to the scheme of CGST Act, 2017 and the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and specifically as regards Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ertain to the relief of prearrest protection and the Apex Court in its order dated 29.05.2019 had made it clear that the dismissal of appeal against Telangana High Court Judgment should be kept in mind while considering the request of prearrest bail. However, neither of the judgment dealt with the issue which is placed before us for consideration. 11. The Apex Court in Criminal M.P. No. 10117 of 2012 in WP(Crl.) No.29 of 2012 in Vijay Sajnani Anr Vs. Union of India made the following observations : Similar matters have been filed before us earlier and in whose matters, we had directed that during interrogation of the petitioner(s), his/their counsel would be allowed to be present within visible dist ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
