Case Law Details
Parveen Jain Vs Directorate of GST Intelligence (Rohtak Court)
In this case the firms which played vital role in issuance of fake invoices are registered at New Delhi. The complainant department has not shown so far that the six firms located at Rohtak (mentioned in Para no 3 of Reply) or their proprietors have been impleaded as accused persons in the present matter. For this reason, this court is of the opinion that the cause of action to prosecute the present applicant- accused arose at New Delhi, where various firms allegedly run and managed by the applicant – accused are registered. The complainant department having not impleaded the firms at Rohtak in this case has impliedly admitted that no cause of action arose at Rohtak.
In this manner, this court is of the opinion that this court lacks the jurisdiction to try the present case. The application in hand is hereby allowed with direction to transit the judicial custody of the accused to the concerned Ld. CMM , New Delhi. The Intelligence is hereby directed to produce the applicant-accused before the court of Ld. CMM, New Delhi within two days positively. The IO shall also be entitled to obtain custody of the applicant-accused from the District jail, Sunaria, Rohtak for the purpose of production before the concerned court. Case papers be accordingly forwarded through proper channel. A copy of this order be provided to the IO as well as the Superintendent District Jail, Sunaria, for further necessary action.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ROHTAK HIGH COURT
1. The present order shall dispose of an application under section 179 CrPC to transit the remand of the applicant- accused to the court of Ld. CMM, New Delhi.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
