Raj Kumar vs Central Goods And Service Tax ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 9322 P&H

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083532




                                                               2023:PHHC:083532
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

209                                           CRM-M-22140-2023 (O&M)
                                              Date of decision: 04.07.2023

Raj Kumar                                                          ...Petitioner
                                     Versus

Central Goods and Service Tax Division Rohtak                      ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL

Present:    Mr. Shivansh Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

            Mr. Deepak Kakkar, Advocate for
            Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Advocate, Sr. Standing Counsel for CGST.
                 ****

HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (ORAL)

Prayer in the present petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to

the present petitioner in complaint case bearing No. COMA-13-2020 dated

04.06.2020 (Annexure P-1) filed by the complainant-respondent under

Sections 8, 21(c), 25, 29, 65 of the NDPS Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was

granted bail by this Court vide order dated 12.05.2022 passed in CRM-M-

52284-2021, but the same has been cancelled by the learned Additional

Sessions Judge, Rohtak on account of unintentional non-appearance of the

petitioner on 12.04.2023 before the learned trial Court and thus, he prays for

grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. In support of his case, learned

counsel for the petitioner relies upon judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench

in CRM-M-21276-2018 titled as Davinder Singh @ Sonu Vs. State of Punjab,

2019 (1) RCR (Criminal) 661.

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the

petitioner could not appear on 12.04.2023, as Sumitra sister of his employer-

Surender Singh, was to be operated on the said date, which is apparent from

1 of 2

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083532

2023:PHHC:083532

the photocopy of indoor patient file (Annexure P-8) of Sumitra. He also

undertakes that in future, the petitioner will not abstain from appearing before

the learned trial Court.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that on

12.04.2023, the petitioner did not appear before the learned trial Court and

neither any application for exemption was moved, nor the learned counsel

representing him appeared before the learned trial Court, therefore, the

petition is liable to be dismissed.

It is a case, wherein, the petitioner had been regularly appearing

before the Court, but he could not appear on a solitary date i.e. 12.04.2023,

for the reasons mentioned above and therefore, his non-appearance on the

said date was unintentional.

The objective of the coercive mechanism prescribed under the

Code of Criminal Procedure is to ensure that the accused remains present

before the Court to receive the orders and judgments as are passed qua the

accused. If the accused shows his sincere intention and desire to appear

before the Court, then it would not be unjustified to protect him from being

arrested.

In view of the above, without commenting on the merits of the

case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to surrender

before the trial Court within two weeks from today and on his doing so, he

shall be released on bail, subject to him furnishing bail/surety bonds to the

satisfaction of the trial Court.

                                               (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
04.07.2023                                             JUDGE
Mangal Singh
               Whether reasoned/speaking?          Yes/No
               Whether reportable?                 Yes/No


                                                            Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083532

                                      2 of 2