Kamal Kumar Sharma And Ors Vs State of Assam And Anr (Gauhati High Court)
The Gauhati High Court has disposed of an anticipatory bail application filed by three petitioners—Kamal Kumar Sharma, Pradip Kumar Sarawgi, and Suraj Pareek—who feared arrest after receiving a notice from the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax.
The petitioners’ counsel argued that the notice, which required them to appear the day after its issuance, did not provide sufficient time to engage a consultant to represent them. They feared that their failure to appear in person would lead to their arrest.
However, the Standing Counsel for State GST clarified that the notice did not mandate personal appearance, as it allowed for representation by an “authorized person.” He also stated that the petitioners could still appear before the authorities on July 31, 2025.
Considering the submissions, the court concluded that there was no immediate apprehension of the petitioners’ arrest. The court disposed of the application, suggesting that the petitioners appear before the Assessing Authority on the new date and seek an extension of time if needed. The judgment did not reference any specific judicial precedents.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF GAUHATI HIGH COURT
1. Heard Mr. Pankaj Das, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel for State GST.
