Law and its Breaches : The Illegality of GST Department

Law and its Breaches : The Illegality of GST Department 

by Vishal

Introduction 

Long ago it was written how kindness is to be shown : - 

"He shall regard with fatherly kindness those who have passed the period of remission of taxes." ["Kautilya's Arthashastra", Translated by R. Shamasastry] 

In an important Judgment, the action of GST Department was quashed. Had the action of GST Department been legal, the petition would have been dismissed. This reinforces that there is indeed a lack of respect for law by GST Department employees. Perhaps, the time is ripe for Hon'ble Courts to ensure that strong and timely disciplinary action against GST Department employees are initiated for acting in contravention of law. The controversy in this case revolved around attachment of bank account.

The Principles Which Were Violated by Tax Department

While allowing the writ petition, important legal principles were enunciated. 

Even if it is assumed that the allegations as levelled by the GST department are correct and the credits though not available were wrongly availed since the tax had been paid, though it was not payable having regard to the fact that there was no supply of goods, the availment of credits could be said to be justified on two counts: (1) it is a revenue neutral satisfaction and (2) payment of tax although not payable yet is to be treated if unavailable credits are reversed if they were wrongly paid. 

Section 83 of the State GST Act, 2017 empowers the Assessing Authority to make a provisional attachment of any property of the assessee during the pendency of any proceeding for the assessment or reassessment of any turnover, even though there is no demand outstanding against the assessee, if he is of the opinion that it is necessary to do so to protect the interest of the revenue. This provision has been made in order to protect the interest of the revenue in cases where the raising of demand is likely to take time because of the investigations and there is apprehension that the assessee may default the ultimate collection of the demand. In other words, Section 83 gives a power to be exercised during the pendency of any proceeding for assessment or reassessment, so that the assessee may not fritter away or secrete his resources out of the reach   of   the   Commercial   Tax   department   when   the   assessment   or reassessment is completed. 

Meaning of The Expression used in S. 83 of SGST Act, 2017

The expression "for the purpose of protecting the interest of the revenue" occurring in Section 83 of the SGST Act is very wide in its meaning. Further, the orders of provisional attachment must be in writing. There must be some material on record to indicate that the Assessing Authority had formed an opinion on the basis thereof that it was necessary to attach the property in order to protect the interest of the revenue. The provisional attachment provided under section 83 is more   like   an   attachment   before   judgment   under   the   Code   of   Civil Procedure. It is a liability on the property. However, the power conferred upon   the   Assessing   Authority   under   Section   83   is   very   drastic,   far reaching power and that power has to be used sparingly and only on substantive weighty grounds and for valid reasons. To ensure that this power is not misused, no safeguards have been provided in the Section 83.   

The Power and the Conditions

One   thing   is   clear   that   this   power   should   be   exercised   by  the Authority only if there is a reasonable apprehension that the assessee may default the ultimate collection of the demand that is likely to be raised   on   completion   of   the   assessment.   It   should,   therefore,   be exercised   with   extreme   care   and   circumspection.   It   should   not   be exercised   unless   there   is   sufficient   material   on   record   to   justify   the satisfaction that the assessee is about to dispose of the whole or any part of his property with a view to thwarting the ultimate collection of the demand. Moreover, attachment should be made of the properties and to the extent it is required to achieve the above object. 

The Invocation of Provisional Attachment & Its Legal Limits

It should neither be used as a tool to harass the assessee nor should it be used in a manner which may have an irreversible detrimental effect on the business of the assessee. The attachment of bank accounts and trading assets should be resorted to only as a last resort because, the attachment of the bank accounts of the assessee would paralyse the functions and business of the assessee. 

The Authority, therefore, should exercise the power   conferred   upon   him   under   Section   83   of   the   SGST Act   with circumspection and fairly and reasonably. No hard and fast rule can be laid down as to how and under what circumstances the power under Section 83 can be invoked by the Authority. The discretion conferred on the Authority shall be brought to bear having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. It is not permissible for the Authority to equate the provisional attachment envisaged under Section 83 of the Act with attachment in the course of the recovery proceedings. 

Case reference is Pranit Hem Desai v. Additional Director General [2019] GCtR 6512 (Gujarat).

Note : Use of Artificial intelligence has not been done at any stage of writing/research for this article.

Legal Compliances in Cases of Cheque Dishonour under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Legal Compliances in Cases of Cheque Dishonour under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

It has been held in S.S. Binu v. State of WB [2018] GCtR 6467 (Calcutta) that in cases falling under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the Magistrate is not mandatorily required to comply with the provisions of Section 202 (1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before issuing summons to an accused residing outside the territorial jurisdiction of the learned Magistrate concerned.

GST / Indirect Tax : Appropriate Legal Remedy to Challenge Order Passed by Tax Department under S.74 of CGST Act, 2017

GST / Indirect Tax : Appropriate Legal Remedy to Challenge Order Passed by Tax Department under S.74 of CGST Act, 2017

In case of Super Service Point v. Union of India [2025] GCtR 1575 (Gujarat), when the order passed under Section 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 in Form GST DRC-07 was challenged it was held that "there is an alternative efficacious remedy available under Section 107 of the GST Act to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority."

It was the case of the petitioner that the adjudicating authority ought to have passed separate orders against the consolidated show cause notice issued for raising the GST liability during the period from July, 2017 to March, 2022.

The decision highlights why knowing statutory remedies is important instead of adopting the short cut of invoking writ jurisdiction in tax matters. 

GST / Indirect Tax : Attachment of Property including Bank Accounts by Tax Department and The Legal Safeguards

GST / Indirect Tax : Attachment of Property including Bank Accounts by Tax Department and The Legal Safeguards

In case of Radha Krishan Industries v. State of HP [2021] GCtR 1585 (SC), it was held that the power to order a provisional attachment of the property of the taxable person including a bank account is draconian in nature and the conditions which are prescribed by the statute for a valid exercise of the power must be strictly fulfilled. The Commissioner is duty bound to deal with the objections to the attachment by passing a reasoned order which must be communicated to the taxable person whose property is attached. 

Legislation enacted for the levy of goods and services tax confers a power on the taxation authorities to impose a provisional attachment on the properties of the assessee, including bank accounts.  

The exercise of the power for ordering a provisional attachment must be preceded by the formation of an opinion by the Commissioner that it is necessary so to do for the purpose of protecting the interest of the government revenue. Before ordering a provisional attachment the Commissioner must form an opinion on the basis of tangible material that the assessee is likely to defeat the demand, if any, and that therefore, it is necessary so to do for the purpose of protecting the interest of the government revenue. The formation of an opinion by the Commissioner under Section 83(1) of HP GST Act, 2017 must be based on tangible material bearing on the necessity of ordering a provisional attachment for the purpose of protecting the interest of the government revenue. 

Section 83 of the Act requires that there must be pendency of proceedings under the relevant provisions mentioned above against the taxable person whose property is sought to be attached. Argument cannot be accepted that merely because proceedings were pending/concluded against another taxable entity, that is GM Powertech, the powers of Sections 83 could also be attracted against the appellant. This interpretation would be an expansion of a draconian power such as that contained in Section 83, which must necessarily be interpreted restrictively. Given that there were no pending proceedings against a person the mere fact that proceedings under Section 74 had concluded against GM Powertech, would not satisfy the requirements of Section 83. Thus, the order of provisional attachment was ultra vires Section 83 of the Act. 

GST / Indirect Tax : Effect of Challenging an Order by Tax Department in Higher Courts

GST / Indirect Tax : Effect of Challenging an Order by Tax Department in Higher Courts

It has been held in Opasil Pigments and Chemicals (P) Ltd v State of UP [2025] GCtR 1574 (Allahabad) that S. 161 of UPGST Act, 2017 cannot be used as a mechanism for recalling the order of appeal, which has been decided on its own merit in favour of the assessee. The rectification of error apparent on the face of record must be reflected at a glance.

The record showed that the order allowing the appeal of the petitioner cannot be recalled merely on the basis of filing of Special Leave to Appeal before the Apex Court in which neither any interim order has been granted nor any prohibition was laid staying the proceedings for passing of the order by the appellate Court, which is a statutory remedy provided under the Act.

In this case, the goods of the applicant were seized and for release of the same, order under Section 129 (1) of UP GST / CGST Act was passed against which Writ Tax No. 865 of 2019 was filed in which an interim order dated 1.8.2019 has been passed directing the seizing authority to release the goods of the petitioner along with vehicle forthwith subject to deposit of security other than cash or bank guarantee or in alternative accept an indemnity bond, equal to the value of tax and penalty to the satisfaction of seizing authority. 

However the Department instead of complying the said order insisted to deposit of security against which Contempt Application (Civil) No. 5428 of 2019 was filed in which no interim order was passed. In the meantime, the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 107 before the appellate authority, which was allowed vide order dated 8.2.2020 on its merit. Thereafter respondent no. 3 moved an application to which the order allowing the appeal was recalled only on the basis that respondent no. 3 has filed Special Leave to Appeal No. 21569 of 2019 before the Apex Court. 

 

GST /Indirect Tax : Procedural Law For Filing Appeal and Shortfall in Pre-Deposit

GST /Indirect Tax : Procedural Law For Filing Appeal and Shortfall in Pre-Deposit

In case of O.C. Infraventures and Construction Pvt Ltd v. State of UP [2025] GCtR 1573 (Lucknow, Allahabad), it was held that for filing appeal under UP GST Act, 2017, pre-deposit made through Electronic Credit Ledger would be a valid deposit. It was held that no opportunity was given to rectify the error even if the appellate authority was of the view that the deposit is not in accordance with law. 

In this case, the appeal preferred by the petitioner was initially dismissed on the ground that the pre-deposit made by the appellant was through electronic credit ledger cannot be considered to be a valid deposit in terms of the mandate of Section 107 of the GST Act. Also, pre-deposit of Rs.15,889/- paid through Electronic Credit Ledger was below the amount prescribed under Section 107(6) of the GST Act and thus the appeal was initially found to be filed without fulfilling the condition of pre-deposit, which is mandatory in terms of Section 107(6) of the GST Act. 

GST / Indirect Tax : Non-Filing of Returns and Cancellation of GST Registration

GST / Indirect Tax : Non-Filing of Returns and Cancellation of GST Registration 

In case of Bala Ji Medical Ajency v. State of UP [2025] GCtR 1572 (Allahabad) which was related to cancellation of GST registration, from a perusal of the Tax Department's notice dated 12.03.2024 it was seen that the petitioner was given 30 days' time from the date of service of notice to submit his reply the 30 days time would continue till 12.04.2024, however, the petitioner was directed to appear before the Jurisdictional Officer before such time expired on 09.04.2024. The notice issued to the petitioner was held to be bad in law. The notice dated 12.03.2024 and the Consequential Order dated 02.05.2024 was also quashed. 

In this case, petitioner is a proprietorship firm registered in August, 2022. Due to some unavoidable circumstances, the petitioner was unable to file return as required under the Act and Rules, a Show Cause Notice for cancellation of registration of GST REG-17 has been issued to the petitioner on 12.03.2024 seeking a reply within 30 days and fixing time and date of personal hearing as 11:00 AM on 09.04.2024 without disclosing the venue/place where the petitioner had to appear to show cause. 

GST / Indirect Tax and Excess Stock : Order passed by Tax Department Levying Tax and Penalty Set Aside by HC

GST / Indirect Tax and Excess Stock : Order passed by Tax Department Levying Tax and Penalty Set Aside by HC

In case of Tru Sound Pvt Ltd v. State of UP [2025] GCtR 1571 (Allahabad), Department's action to impose penalty and tax after issuing notice under S.130 and S.122 of UP GST Act, 2017 was set aside. It may be noted that earlier it has been held in Vijay Trading Company v. Additional Commissioner [2024] GCtR 3451 (Allahabad) that "proceedings under S. 130 of the GST Act, 2017 cannot be put to service if excess stock is found at the time of survey".

In this case [Tru Sound (supra)], a survey was conducted at the business premises of the petitioner without there being any Panchnama and the alleged excess stock was found.

GST / Indirect Tax : Power and Procedure under S.83 of CGST Act, 2017 in Respect of Attachment of Bank Accounts by Tax Department

GST / Indirect Tax : Power and Procedure under S.83 of CGST Act, 2017 in Respect of Attachment of Bank Accounts by Tax Department

Recently, in case of Kanta Food Product v. Union of India [2025] GCtR 1562 (Delhi) the scope of S.83 of CGST Act, 2017 was discussed.

In case of KPN Travels India Ltd v. DGGST Intelligence [2022] GCtR 1995 (Madras), scope of S.83 of CGST Act, 2017 was also explained with respect to bank account attachment. Tax Department official has invoked that power "in order to protect the interest of the Revenue" to provisionally attach the bank account. The order passed by Tax Department failed to pass legal scrutiny and they were set aside. 

Now, we can see that both these findings clearly chalk out the scope of S.83 of CGST Act, 2017. When KPN Travels laid down the law in the year 2022, should it not be asked as to how the Tax Department officials have ignored that principle and passed another order due to which the case of Kanta Food arose ? 

Are Tax Department officials unaware of law passed in the year 2022 and are they are at liberty to ignore and act in contravention of law laid down in the year 2022 ? This certainly cannot be a tenable ground because Tax Department officials are educated individuals and they are presumed to have knowledge of law. If the argument that Department officials were unaware of law laid down in various Judgments, it would lead to anarchy because Department officials would start ignoring every judgment in order to take an excuse of their ignorance. Hon'ble Courts and Department should devise a mechanism where ignorant Tax Officials are penalised monetarily and Tax Officials who pass orders based on judicial precedents are rewarded. This can be easily done by imposing exemplary costs to be recovered from salary/pension of concerned Tax Department Official as doing so would be clearly in line with law laid down in PSPCL v. Atma Singh Grewal [2013] GCtR 6208 (SC) as well as by initiating contempt proceedings against such Tax Department Officials. If that's not done, the business-friendly atmosphere will be difficult to be developed. 

Link of the Article discussing Kanta Food Product Case  is given below : 

https://vishallegalghy.blogspot.com/2025/09/gst-indirect-tax-attachment-of-bank.html

Multiplier in Compensation under MV Act, 1988 : Clarifying the Law

Multiplier in Compensation under MV Act : Clarifying the Law

In one of the case the issue of multiplier arose.

In Grace Geetha v. Vivek Transporters [2020] GCtR 1054 (Madras), the Tribunal had taken 14 as multiplier considering the age of the mother of the deceased. It was held that the position is now set right by the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court. Even in cases where the claimants are parents, the multiplier should be fixed based on the age of the deceased. Therefore, the proper multiplier that should be adopted by the Tribunal is 18.

Accordingly, the compensation amount was granted with interest.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.

Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 : Some Important Features

 Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 : Some Important Features

S.2 (b) says "conclusive proof" means when one fact is declared by said Adhiniyam to be conclusive proof of another, the Court shall, on proof of the one fact, regard the other as proved, and shall not allow evidence to be given for the purpose of disproving it.

Sec. 20 says oral admissions as to the contents of a document are not relevant, unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained, or unless the genuineness of a document produced is in question.

A criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding between the prosecutor and the accused within the meaning of S.27 of BSA, 2023.

Sec. 34 of BSA, 2023 says that the existence of any judgment, order or decree which by law prevents any Court from taking cognizance of a suit or holding a trial, is a relevant fact when the question is whether such Court ought to take cognizance of such suit or to hold such trial.

S.113 says when the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he is not the owner is on the person who affirms that he is not the owner.

S.108 says when a person is accused of any offence, the burden of proving the existence of circumstances bringing the case within any of the General Exceptions in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 or within any special exception or proviso contained in any other part of the said Sanhita, or in any law defining the offence, is upon him, and the Court shall presume the absence of such circumstances.

S.102 says persons who are not parties to a document, or their representatives in interest, may give evidence of any facts tending to show a contemporaneous agreement varying the terms of the document.

S.93 says where any electronic record, purporting or proved to be 5 years old, is produced from any custody which the Court in the particular case considers proper, the Court may presume that the electronic signature which purports to be the electronic signature of any particular person was so affixed by him or any person authorised by him in this behalf.

Sec. 53 says no fact needs to be proved in any proceeding which the parties thereto or their agents agree to admit at the hearing, or which, before the hearing, they agree to admit by any writing under their hands, or which by any rule of pleading in force at the time they are deemed to have admitted by their pleadings:

Sec. 46 says in civil cases the fact that the character of any person concerned is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct imputed to him, is irrelevant, except in so far as such character appears from facts otherwise relevant.

Sec. 45 says whenever the opinion of any living person is relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is based are also relevant.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.

Rape of a Woman : HC Finds Acquittal of Accused Valid

 Rape of a Woman : HC Finds Acquittal of Accused Valid

In a case, the allegations were on rape.

In Sudha Rani v State [2014] GCtR 4368 (Delhi), the acquittal of rape-accused was found valid.

It was noted that "the parameters for interference in the order of acquittal are confined. It is only if there is a total illegality or perversity pointed out that the fact findings returned by the acquitting Court can be interfered with." The principle that "where on the evidence two possibilities are available or open, one which goes in favour of the prosecution and the other which benefits an accused, the accused is undoubtedly entitled to the benefit of doubt" was also noted. The Order of Trial Court notes that "it is one of the basic principles of criminal jurisprudence that let hundreds of criminal may go unpunished but one innocent person should not be punished". 

Acquittal of accused was found valid.

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.

Cause of Action and Effect of Filing Application under O.7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

 Cause of Action and Effect of Filing Application under O.7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 : Whether Imposition of Costs on Defendant is a Possibility ?

In a case, A (plaintiff) filed the suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.35,60,000/-, i.e., principal amount of Rs.32 lakhs along with pre-suit interest of Rs.3,60,000/- besides pendent lite and future interest.

A in the plaint has contended that Sh. Raj Kumar Chawla was the proprietor of Defendants No. 4 and 5 concerns and is the predecessor of defendants No.1 to 3.

Defendant [D] by an application has contended that A have miserably failed to file any written condition for refund of double amount of the amount paid by the A to the predecessor of D.  D filed an application under O. 7 Rule 11 (a) for rejection of plaint. It is true that plaint under Order 7 rule 11(a) is to be rejected where it does not disclose any cause of action.

It was reiterated that "pleas taken by the defendant in the written statement would be irrelevant". It is only where on examination of the plaint the court comes to a conclusion that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action, the same is liable to be rejected. While examining the case under Order 7 rule 11, if the court comes to a conclusion that the plaint discloses a cause of action, the plaint cannot be rejected. The defence raised by the defendant in his Written Statement is irrelevant and is not to be considered.

So, by concluding that application filed by D was without merit and only to delay and protract litigation, costs were imposed on D.

Refer Indu Chawla v Bharat Chawala [2014] GCtR 4366 (Delhi).

Lesson : Adventurism backfired. Perhaps, a lesson that efforts to delay disposal of case would entail imposition of costs on party which tries to delay it. This also supports the proposition that adjournment seekers, too, must meet the same fate of being slapped with imposition of costs because adjournment is a ploy to delay litigations in many cases.

 Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.

IOCL's Decision Quashed by High Court

 IOCL's Decision Quashed by High Court 

In an interesting case, the IOCL's action was quashed. 

In David Brahma v State of Assam [2016] GCtR 4346 (Gauhati), it was held "in Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary (5th Edition), the word “locality” is defined to mean, amongst others, “a district or area, especially one near or surrounding”, whereas the word “location” is defined to mean “a place or position”. Thus, the word “locality” seems to have a wider connotation than the word “location” and the advertisement designedly and consciously used the expression “location or locality”. If both the words carry the same meaning, there would have been no occasion for the IOCL authorities to have used both the expressions “location” or “locality”. The purpose was to enlarge the area of the location to bring within its fold the neighbourhood areas."

"A few feet or several hundred yards or even a greater distance from an object would be in its neighbourhood and no mathematical formula has been fixed to define and measure neighbourhood, which has an element of flexibility in it."

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.

Interesting Judgments on Criminal Law : A Collection

Interesting Judgments on Criminal Law : A Collection

During the course of education in law, Indian students even in India are encouraged to read things which have "international" flavour.  "International criminal law (ICL) constitutes the fusion of two legal disciplines: international law and domestic criminal law. While it is true that one may discern certain criminal law elements in the science of international law, it is certainly not the totality of these elements that make up the discipline of ICL." [International Criminal Law, Ilias Bantekas and Susan Nash, 2nd Edition, Cavendish Publishing Ltd]

The article is about nothing international. Utility of domestic criminal law will always triumph over international criminal law. The present article is a collection of domestic rulings on some interesting aspects of criminal law. 

In Md. Hasmat Ali v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4339 (Gauhati) it has been held that "It is highly an improbable proposition that a father of a married daughter in an Indian society would allow her to carry illicit relationship with her paramour in the absence of her husband and would react indifferently when reported by his son-in-law."

It has been reiterated in Shyamal Das v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4340 (Gauhati) that "mere abscondance of an accused does not lead to a firm conclusion of his guilty mind, as even an innocent man may abscond in order to evade arrest and such an action may be part of the natural conduct of the accused."

In Dandeswar Barman v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4343 (Gauhati) it has been held that it is the golden principle of criminal jurisprudence that ocular evidence must always be given preference to the expert opinion even if the expert opinion does not support the ocular evidence.

In Raju Satwal @ Chowtal v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4344 (Gauhati) it was noted that the recovery of the knife at the instance of the accused also operates as strong evidence against the accused.

In Satish Kumar Kalra v CBI [2017] GCtR 1138 (Gauhati) it has been held that "the inherent power under Section 482 of the CrPC envisages three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised, namely (i) to give effect under the Code (ii) to prevent abuse of process of court and (iii) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The rule of inherent power has its source in the maxim “quando alique, concebit conceditur id sine quo resipsa esse non protest”, which means that when the law gives a person anything, it gives him that without which thing itself cannot exist. While exercising the power under the Section the court does not function as a court of appeal or revision."

It has been held in Mst. Maherun Nessa v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4341 (Gauhati) that "it is well settled that in a case of circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must establish all the circumstances by independent evidence and the circumstances so established must form a complete chain in proof of guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubts. The circumstances so proved must also be consistent only with the guilt of accused."

In Ripon Mollah v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4307 (Gauhati) it was held that ordinarily it is not open to the High Court when there is concurrent finding of facts to interfere in its revisional jurisdiction, unless it is shown that the evidence on record was misread or misinterpreted by the courts below.

In Rocky Kalandi v State of Assam [2017] GCtR 4342 (Gauhati), doctor has also not opined that the head injury was possibly caused by some weapon ; the conviction under S.302, IPC was converted to the one under S.304 Part II of IPC, 1860. 

Written by 

Vishal

Delhi

Notice : Copyright of above blog and its content including headline vests with Vishal. Above should Not be reproduced in any form in newspapers/websites/Ph.D. thesis/College projects/ law firms' newsletters/law journals/books/book chapters/blogs without prior written permission. Fair use should be in terms of Copyright Act, 1957. Any violation will make violator liable for Pecuniary compensation with interest towards the author irrespective of the profit made by the violator. All disputes shall be subject to Delhi Jurisdiction. Reproduction of judgment or publication of judgment unless expressly prohibited by Court according is not an infringement of copyright according to S. 52 (1)(q)(iv) of Copyright Act, 1957. This is not to be considered as any professional legal advice and does not constitute client-attorney relationship.

Vacancy for Law Graduates in Government Organisation

 Vacancy for Law Graduates in Government Organisation 

Recently it has been notified.

NIOS has issued notification for Consultant (Legal).

a. Bachelor’s degree in Law from recognized University / Institution. 

b. More than 5 years post qualification experience of handling cases in District Courts,High Courts, Supreme Court.

Check their website : https://www.nios.ac.in/vacancy.aspx