Pradeep Kumar Paswan vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4076 Patna

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7477 of 2021
                                Arising out of
                   CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 30084 of 2013
      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2050 Year-2011 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                              Vaishali
      ======================================================

Pradeep Kumar Paswan, Male, aged about 58 years, Son of Late Binul Ram, Resident of Mohalla- Hela Bazar (Navjeevan Colony), PS- Hazipur (Town), District- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. The Superintendent of Police, Vaishali.

3. The Director of Investigation, Income Tax, Bihar.

4. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Bihar and Jharkhand.

5. Anuradha Mehta @ Anuradha Mundkur, Female Daughter of Late Ravindra Nath Mehta and Wife of Balmiki Mundkur, Resident of 36/201, Heritage City, Gurgaon, Haryana.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

      For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Amarendra Nath Verma, Advocate
      For the State           :       Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 11-08-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Amarendra Nath Verma, learned counsel

for the petitioner and Dr. Ajeet Kumar, learned Additional Public

Prosecutor (APP) for the State. Despite service of notice on

learned counsel for the Income Tax, nobody appeared on its

behalf.

3. The petitioner seeks modification of the judgment and

order dated 17.05.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30084 of 2013, by

which the Income Tax Department was directed to take action Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7477 of 2021 dt.11-08-2021

under the relevant provisions of Income Tax Act, 1961 or any

ancillary or complimentary provision with regard to the issue.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he

was the opposite party no. 2 and the direction to the Income Tax

authorities was against him. It was submitted that though the

petitioner has sufficient material to satisfy the authorities that the

money paid by him was through proper legal sources, but because

of the order of the Court, the Income Tax authorities are in the

process of passing adverse order. It was submitted that the Court

may protect the legal right of the petitioner for a fair consideration

as the authorities only in view of the order of the Court are bent

upon passing adverse order.

5. Having considered the matter, the Court finds that

there is no specific direction to pass any particular order and the

matter has been left to the discretion of the authorities who are

supposed to go into the details, both on the factual and legal

aspects and then pass a reasoned order. Thus, the Court does not

find any occasion to modify the judgment and order dated

17.05.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30084 of 2013. However, it is

clarified that the Court had not expressed any opinion with regard

to the merits of the matter and further, it goes without saying that

the authorities concerned have to act in the matter, in accordance Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7477 of 2021 dt.11-08-2021

with law, objectively and on its own merits without being

prejudiced by any observation made in the order dated

17.05.2019.

6. The petition stands disposed of.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T