MADHAVJIBHAI DHANJIBHAI PATEL V. UNION OF INDIA

SCR.A/666/2001

AI Insights

In the case of Madhavjibhai Dhanjibhai Patel versus the Union of India, the petitioner sought an amendment to the memo of petition, which was granted by the court. The core issue arose from the proceedings of a criminal case pending against the petitioner, which he contested. The court decided to stay these proceedings, citing the precedent set in the Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Bhupen Champaklal Dalal case, which justified the High Court's authority to grant interim stays under similar circumstances. The petitioner had approached the appellate authority for resolution, prompting the court to stay the ongoing criminal proceedings until the appellate authority's decision.

• Counselvise Citation: [2002] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 769060 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 24-04-2002
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Bhupen Champaklal Dalal, Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. B.C. Dalal
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B B NAIK; V M PANCHOLI
• Assessee Lawyers: B M MANGUKIYA; BELA PRAJAPATI
• Keywords: Immunity from prosecution; Interim Stay; Settlement Commissioner; Stay of proceeding
• Section: 245-H

Judgement Text

" IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No 666 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.P.BUCH ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO @ MADHAVJIBHAI DHANJIBHAI PATEL Versus UNION OF INDIA -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Criminal Application No. 666 of 2001 MR BM MANGUKIYA for Petitioner No. 1 MS BELA A PRAJAPATI for Petitioner No. 1 MR BB NAIK for Respondent No. 1 NOTICE UNSERVED for Respondent No. 2 MR VM PANCHOLI, LD ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent No. 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.P.BUCH Date of decision: 24/04/2002 ORAL JUDGEMENT #. Rule. Mr.B.B.Naik, learned advocate waives service of rule on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.V.M.Pancholi, learned APP waive service of rule on behalf of State of Gujarat. #. The learned advocate for the petitioner had filed draft amendment on the earlier date. After hearing the learned advocates for the parties the said application is allowed and the petitioner herein is permitted to amend the memo of petition in terms of the draft amendment application. #. During the course of hearing it is noticed that when an exigency of present nature arises the proper course is to direct a stay of the proceeding as has been said in case of Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Bhupen Champaklal Dalal, reported in Income Tax Reporters (Vol.248) ITR 830. There it was laid down that the High Court was justified in granting interim stay. #. Keeping in view the said decision it would be proper to direct that the proceeding in question be stayed till the final disposal of the matter pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate till the appellate authority decides the matter as it has been represented that the petitioner has approached the said authority for the redressal of his grievance. #. For the foregoing reasons, it is directed that the proceeding of Criminal Case No.750/1997 pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Surat shall be stayed till the final disposal of the proceeding before No.10/S/078/96-97/IT of 1997 in terms of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. B.C. Dalal reported in 2001 I.T.R. 830. #. It appears from the provision made in Sub Section (1) of Section 245-H, 1961, that the Settlement Commissioner has power to grant immunity from prosecution and, therefore, the said prayer can be made there and if it is made there then naturally the said authority will deal with and decide the same in accordance with law. #. In above view of the matter, this petition is ordered to be disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute as above. D.S. is permitted. ( D. P. BUCH, J.) kks "