IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-29202 of 2008
Date of decision: 21st January, 2009
Rajiv Bajaj
... Petitioner
Versus
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
Present: Ms. Radhika Suri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Kapil Aggarwal, Advocate for
Mr. K.K. Mehta, Senior Standing Counsel for respondents.
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner was summoned under Section 276(c)(1) and
Section 277 of the Income Tax Act read with Section 420 IPC.
Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the order (Annexure
P-4) passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Ludhiana, to say
that petitioner has been absolved of any penalty or payment of tax. It has
been further submitted that continuation of the proceedings in a complaint
filed by the department is not only misuse and abuse of the process of law
but is contrary to the mandate of law laid down in ‘G.L. Didwania and
another v. Income-Tax Officer and another’ 1997 Income Tax Reporter
687. After issuance of the summons, next stage before the trial Court is for
framing of the charge. Before that exercise is taken, petitioner may file an
application for discharge before the trial Court, raising all the pleas,
available to him under law. Application so filed, shall be dealt with on
Criminal Misc. No. M-29202 of 2008 2
merits and decided by the Court before petitioner is to appear for framing
of the charge.
Accordingly, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file an
application for discharge, before the trial Court. The trial Court shall decide
the application on merits. On the date when the application is to be
decided, personal appearance of the petitioner shall remain exempted. He
will be represented by his counsel.
With these observations, present petition is disposed off.
[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE
January 21, 2009
rps