Facts of the Case

Sunny Singhal filed a petition before the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh seeking to quash an order dated 26.08.2019 passed in Criminal Complaint No. 400 of 2019 dated 24.08.2019, which had been lodged against him under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 by the Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence, Rohtak. The matter was taken up through video conferencing on 20.10.2023. At the hearing, counsel for the petitioner sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petition rather than press it to a decision on merits.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the criminal complaint filed under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017 against the petitioner was liable to be quashed.
  2. What consequence follows for pending applications once the main petition is withdrawn.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • Sought quashing of the order dated 26.08.2019 in the criminal complaint registered under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017.
  • At the hearing, chose not to press the grounds urged in the petition and instead sought leave to withdraw it.

Respondent's Arguments

  • Counsel appeared for the Directorate General of GST Intelligence, Rohtak; the order does not record any substantive contest, as the matter was disposed of on the petitioner's own request for withdrawal.

Court Order/Findings

  • On the petitioner's counsel seeking permission to withdraw, the Court dismissed the petition as withdrawn.
  • No adjudication was made on the merits of the Section 132 CGST Act complaint; the petition was disposed of purely on the basis of withdrawal.
  • As a consequence of the main case being dismissed as withdrawn, any pending application was rendered infructuous.

Important Clarification

  • Withdrawal of a quashing petition filed against a criminal complaint under Section 132 of the CGST Act leaves the underlying complaint and trial proceedings entirely unaffected.
  • An accused who withdraws such a petition remains free to raise all available defences, including those originally urged in the writ/quashing petition, before the trial court.
  • A dismissal "as withdrawn" carries no precedential value on the interpretation of Section 132 and should not be read as any comment on the strength of the prosecution's case.

Sections Involved

  • Section 132, CGST Act, 2017 — punishment for specified offences, including fraudulent evasion of tax and wrongful availment/utilisation of input tax credit.

Decision – In Favour of

The petition was dismissed as withdrawn at the petitioner's own instance, with no finding on the merits of the Section 132 CGST Act complaint. This cannot be characterised as a win for either the assessee or the department — the prosecution remains pending before the trial court, untouched by this order.

Related Case Laws

No directly on-point case notes are currently published on this site.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
  • Case No.: CRM-M-52164-2021
  • CNR: Not available
  • Coram: Hon'ble Mr Justice Avneesh Jhingan
  • Decision Date: 20 October 2023
  • Disposal Nature: Dismissed as withdrawn

Link to Download the Order

Download the full judgment (PDF)

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.