9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Satyaprakash Sharma, Mr. Ashutosh Mishra and Mr. Rupesh Dubey. For the Respondent No. 4-State : Mrs. P. P. Shinde, A.P.P. ORDER (PER REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.) : 1. By this petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks quashing and setting aside of his arrest by the respondent No. 3-Inspector, CGST and Central Excise, Mumbai (West Commissionerate) and for a declaration that the said arrest is illegal and contrary to law. Other prayers are also sought, including the prayer for interim cash bail / regular bail. 2. Mr. Ponda, learned senior counsel for the petitioner submitted that the investigation carried out by the respondent No. 2 i.e. CGST relates to an old case of 2021. He submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s/background, having regard to the respondent No. 2's claim that in 2024, they did not have ready copies of the GST returns and had to download it for 4 hours. He submitted that the mention of the said fact in the affidavit of the respondent No. 2 is nothing but an endeavour to explain the delay for non-production of the petitioner within 24 hours. He further submitted that if the timeline as set out in the affidavit is seen, there is a delay of 13 hours, which delay was not mentioned by the respondent No. 2 in their reply filed to the application preferred by the petitioner opposing the petitioner's remand before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate on 15th April 2024. Mr. Ponda pointed out to the contradictions in the reply filed by the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner by the respondent No. 2, pursuant to which, the police visited the respondent No. 2's office. He submitted that the case in which the petitioner is arrested, is an old case and that the petitioner was arrested, despite paying taxes and as such, the arrest smacks of arbitrariness and high-handedness. Learned counsel relied on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra (2021) 2 SCC 427, in particular, paragraph 68 thereof. 4. Learned ASG, opposed the petition and submitted that the arrest was legal and there is no merit in the submission of the petitioner that he was illegally detained by the respondent No. 2. Learned ASG relied on the affidavit filed by the respondent No. 2, set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... memo along with DIN took another 4 hours. Prima facie, we do not find, in the facts, that there was any reason for the respondent No. 2 to keep the petitioner overnight, when he came on 13th March 2023, more particularly, if the respondent No. 2 did not have documents to question the petitioner. It is not as if, the petitioner had not cooperated with the authorities and as such, it was well within the powers of the respondent No. 2 to call him on some other day or even on the next day. We deprecate the practice of keeping a person overnight under the guise of recording of his statement, irrespective of whether the person volunteered or not. Arrest is a serious matter and cannot be made in a routine manner on a mere allegation of commission ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
