Gujarat High Court High Court

Chandula vs State on 28 March, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Chandula vs State on 28 March, 2011
Author: Md Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCR.A/2086/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 2086 of 2010
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

CHANDULA
PURSHOTAMDAS PATEL & 2 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
PY DIVYESHVAR for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 3. 
Mr.L.R.Pujari, APP  for Respondent(s) :
1, 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 21/03/2011 

 

ORAL
ORDER

The
present application under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
has been filed for quashing of CC No.301 of 1989 pending in 9th
Metro Court, Ahmedabad qua the petitioners.

Heard
learned advocate, Mr.P.Y.Divyeshvar for the petitioners, learned
Addl. Public Prosecutor, Mr.L.R.Pujari for the respondent No.1.
Sales Tax Officer of Sales Tax Department, Mr.R.S.Trivedi on behalf
of the respondent No.2 is also present in Court.

Mr.R.S.Trivedi,
Sales Tax Officer of the Sales Tax Department, has stated at the bar
through learned APP, that entire tax is paid by the petitioners
after filing of complaint with the Sales Tax Department. A letter to
this effect was sent to the learned Public Prosecutor of the trial
court seeking to withdraw the complaint. He has also stated that now
there is no due qua the present petitioners and necessary
instructions have been given by the concerned Officer to the learned
Public Prosecutor of the trial who was in charge of the case for
withdrawal of the same. However, it has not been withdrawn by the
learned Public Prosecutor.

In
view of the facts that the entire tax amount has been paid by the
petitioners and no amount is left due towards tax to the Sales Tax
Department coupled with the fact that Sales Tax Department has
instructed the learned Public Prosecutor of the trial court to
withdraw the complaint, there is no purpose in proceeding with the
complaint and the
impugned complaint is required to be quashed and set aside.

Hence,
the present petition is allowed. Complaint being CC
No.301 of 1989 pending in 9th Metro Court, Ahmedabad, and
the proceedings thereunder are quashed and
set aside qua the present petitioners.

(M.D.SHAH,J.)

radhan

   

Top