TMI Blog2023 (7) TMI 251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hon'ble Supreme Court. In view of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and considering that identical was the situation there, the Court finds that directions under paragraphs 21.4 and 21.5 of the said judgment, are sufficient to dispose of this petition - petition dismissed. - W.P. (Cr.) No. 141 of 2022 - - - Dated:- 4-7-2023 - HON BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, Advocate Ms. Kumari Ranjana Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Devesh Krishna, S.C. (Mines)-III Heard Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Devesh Krishna, learned counsel for the State. 2. This petition has been filed for quashing of the First Information Report as well as entire criminal proceeding in connection with Patratu (Bhurkunda) P.S. Case No. 45/2021, corresponding to Commercial P.S. Case No. 3/2021, registered for the offences under Sections 120B/406/420/471 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 132(1)(b), 132(1)(c), 132(1)(e) and 132(1)(f) of the Jharkhand Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'JGST Act, 2017'), pending in the court of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rk place no hoarding with respect to name of the enterprise and GSTIN No. no accounts with respect to inward and outward supply such as invoice, transport bill, payment details etc. were produced. It was further alleged that despite grant of sufficient time to the petitioner, though he appeared before the authority but failed to produce books of accounts as such a proceeding under section 74(1) of JGST Act 2017 has been started. Entire business done by the petitioner's enterprise was declare fraud operation in the E-Mail notice sent to the petitioner. Thereafter despite sufficient opportunity being given, petitioner failed to plead his case and produce books of accounts, as such entire ITC claim of the petitioner under JGST Act 2017 has been rejected u/s 16(2) and for the period 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 demand of tax, interest and penalty has been made in DRC-07 form. Besides CGST Ramgarh was also requested to cancel the registration of GSTIN-20AOLPP2899H1ZL of M/S Bhurkunda Coal Depot, which petitioner obtained after cancellation of his previous GSTIN. It has further been alleged that with the intention to commit fraud the trader has misused his GST registration and cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from the premises of the petitioner and there was no movement of coal between any of the parties. He further submits that when criminality is made out, Special Law as well as IPC sections are attracted and to buttress this argument, he relied upon paragraphs 7 and 8 of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in The State of Maharashtra another v. Sayyed Hassan Sayyed Subhan others in Criminal Appeal No.1195 of 2018, dated 20.09.2018. 6. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the said judgment are quoted hereinbelow: 7. There is no bar to a trial or conviction of an offender under two different enactments, but the bar is only to the punishment of the offender twice for the offence. Where an act or an omission constitutes an offence under two enactments, the offender may be prosecuted and punished under either or both enactments but shall not be liable to be punished twice for the same offence. The same set of facts, in conceivable cases, can constitute offences under two different laws. An act or an omission can amount to and constitute an offence under the IPC and at the same time, an offence under any other law. The High Court ought to have taken note of Section 26 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner. 11. In the FIR, sanction by the competent authority is annexed and he has granted sanction and, thereafter, the FIR has been registered. 12. So far as the judgment relied by Mr. Prabhat Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner with regard to Special Law is concerned, that is not in dispute. The dispute in the case in hand of forging of invoice and bill without any transaction of coal and the Court finds that if such a dispute is there, it has been set at rest by reasoned judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jayant and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh with one analogous case; [(2021) 2 SCC 670] wherein at paragraph 21, directions have been issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Paragraph 21 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow: 21. After giving our thoughtful consideration in the matter, in the light of the relevant provisions of the MMDR Act and the Rules made thereunder vis- -vis the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Penal Code, and the law laid down by this Court in the cases referred to hereinabove and for the reasons stated hereinabove, our conclusions are as under: 21.1. That the learned Magistrate can in exercise of powers u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
