TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 729X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ORDER Hearing conducted through Video Conferencing. Petitioner No.1 is a limited Company and Mr. Manoj Garg-Petitioner No.2 is its Director and are engaged in the Manufacturing of Railway Signaling Cables,Electric Cables,Power Cables etc. and trading of cooper rods/wire as well aluminum rods/wires. During investigation for the violation of Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 against M/s MICA Industries, the alleged role of the petitioners for issuance of fake/bogus invoices in respect of copper wire metal is stated to have surfaced leading to search of the premises of the petitioners as also arrest of petitioner no.2 on 18.07.2019. After completing investigation the respondents have filed a complaint under Section 132 of the CGST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r arrest or sentence for an offence against the law may be inserted in any enactment , if permitted by the Constitution. The contention is sought to be fortified with the cited entries of Schedule VII and different Articles of the Constitution i.e. (i) Entry 93 of Union List and 64 of State List specifically empowers Legislature to make law for offences against laws with respect to any of the matters in the Union/State List. Thus Union and State Legislature while introducing any enactment in exercise of powers conferred by the entries of Union/State Lists in Schedule VII gets the power to insert provisions for offences. (ii) sub clause (i) of clause 2 of Article 323-B authorizes legislature to make law for offences with respect to any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contemplates filing of complaint after arrest and completion of investigation nor appoints any officer who is competent to file complaint even though Section 134 of CGST Act mandates that no court shall take cognizance except with the previous sanction of the Commissioner. In support of his contentions, learned Counsel relies upon judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.G. Jaisinghani Vs. UOI 1967(2) SCR 703, Maneka Gandhi Vs. UOI 1978(1) SCC 248 and Shayara Bano Vs. UOI 2017(9) SCC 1. We find considerable force in the submissions raised and demonstrated by Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for the Petitioner. Notice of motion for 30.07.2020. Mr. Satya Pal Jain, Additional Solicitor General of India assisted by Mr. Dheeraj Jain, Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
