Case Law Details
Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court disposed of a petition seeking directions against a private respondent for alleged offences including cheating, forgery, falsification of records, fraudulent manipulation of GST records, and criminal misappropriation of GST amounts allegedly collected from the petitioner. The petitioner also sought a fair investigation in accordance with law.
During the proceedings, counsel for the petitioner informed the Court that a representation dated 06.11.2025 had already been submitted before respondent No.5 and requested that directions be issued for its consideration within a stipulated period.
Taking note of this submission and the appearance of the State through its counsel, the Court directed respondent No.5 to decide the petitioner’s representation (Annexure P-7) by passing a speaking order within one month from the receipt of a copy of the Court’s order. The Court clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations contained in the representation. Respondent No.5 was granted liberty to independently assess the contents of the representation and take a decision in accordance with law.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
1. The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner for directions to the respondent Nos.1 to 4 to take appropriate action against respondent No.7 for the commission of offence of cheating, forgery, falsification of record, fraudulent manipulation of GST record and criminal misappropriation of GST amount collected from the petitioner and to conduct fair investigation in accordance with law.
2. The learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed the representation dated 06.11.2025 (Annexure P-7) before the respondent No.5. The learned counsel prays for disposing of the present petition by issuing directions to the respondent No.5 to decide the abovementioned representation within the stipulated time.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. I.P.S. Sabharwal, DAG, Punjab, has appeared on behalf of respondent-State.
Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby dispensed with.
5. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, the present petition is hereby disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.5 to decide the representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-7), by passing a speaking order within a period of one month from the date of receipt of copy of instant order. It is, however, clarified that no finding is being returned, by this Court, with regard to merits of the contents of representation. The respondent No.5 shall be at liberty to make an independent assessment with regard to contents of representation of the petitioner, and take an independent decision at his own level.
Author Bio
