O R D E R

[Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

CM APPL. 33267/2022

1. This is an application moved on behalf of the petitioner, essentially for recording the appearance of the counsel who appeared for the petitioner on 15.07.2022.

1.1 Mr. Harsh Sethi, who appears on behalf of the petitioner says that he was present on 15.07.2022.

1.2. Ordinarily, Mr. Sethi should have filed an affidavit and placed on record the fact that he was present in Court on the said date along with the application.

2. However, Mr. Aditya Singla, who appears on behalf of the respondent/revenue, who is present in Court, affirms the position that Mr. Sethi was present in Court on the said date.

3. Given this position, the prayer made in the captioned application is allowed.

4. The record will show that on 15.07.2022, Mr. Sethi was present in Court.

4.1. For the purposes of good order and record, Mr. Sethi will ensure that the affidavit is placed on record in the within the next ten days.

5. The application is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

CM APPL. 33266/2022

6. This is an application whereby a direction is sought for compliance of the order dated 15.07.2022.

7. The matter was listed before the Court for the first time on 12.07.2022, when we had recorded the grievance of the petitioner that the provisional attachment order dated 31.12.2019 had lost its efficacy, and therefore, had to be withdrawn.

7.1 Given this fact, the matter was directed to be listed on 15.07.2022, with leave to Mr. Singla to return with instructions in the matter.

7.2. On 15.07.2022, Mr. Singla informed us that the provisional attachment order dated 31.12.2019 had not been extended and accordingly, the same would stand dissolved.

7.3. We were also informed by Mr. Singla that necessary instructions would be issued to the concerned bank by the respondent/revenue within the next five days.

7.4. Based on this statement, the writ petition was disposed of.

8. Today, Mr. Singla has placed before us, a copy of the statement of the affiant i.e., Mr. Surat Singh, which has been recorded in Hindi.

8.1. This statement was recorded in the office of the respondent/revenue, on 18.07.2022.

8.2. Broadly, the thrust of the statement made by Mr. Singh appears to be that he was not aware of the fact that a writ petition had been filed in the name of M/s Apex Traders.

8.3. The statement is also suggestive of the fact that the affiant, Mr. Surat Singh, was merely a name-lender, and that for this facility, he was paid Rs. 10,000/- per month by one Mr. Ravinder Baweja.

8.4. Furthermore, the statement is also suggestive of the fact that the affiant, Mr. Surat Singh was informed by Mr. Baweja that the brain behind this ploy is one Mr. Gaurav Gupta.

9. Mr. Harsh Sethi, who, as indicated above, appears on behalf of the petitioner, has stated at the Bar that Mr. Surat Singh had instructed him to file the writ petition and that the affidavit accompanying the writ petition was prepared at his behest and in his presence.

9.1. Mr. Sethi also confirms that the affidavit accompanying the writ petition has been signed by Mr. Surat Singh.

10. We may also note that Mr. Singla has placed before us, apart from the statement of the affiant/Mr. Surat Singh dated 18.07.2022, a photocopy of his Aadhar card.

10.1 Facially, the signatures on the Aadhar card seem to match the signatures on the affidavit accompanying the writ petition.

11. For the moment, we would require Mr. Sethi to file an affidavit concerning the submissions made by him before us at the Bar today.

11.1. The affidavit will be filed within the next one week.

12. We may also record that the documents furnished by Mr. Singla, also include a communication dated 25.07.2022 which has been addressed by Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, Advocate, to Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Superintendent; who, was instrumental in recording the statement of Mr. Surat Singh.

12.1. This communication refers to summons dated 22.07.2022, which required Mr. Surat Singh to present himself before the aforementioned officer i.e., Mr. Mukesh Kumar.

12.2. The stand taken in this communication on behalf of the affiant/Mr. Surat Singh, is that since a comprehensive inquiry had been initiated by Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI), Chandigarh, and a criminal complaint had been filed under Section 132 of the CGST Act, 2017, multiple investigations could not be carried out by embarking upon another enquiry.

12.3. In other words, the plea advanced in the communication dated 25.07.2022, was that the summons should be withdrawn.

13. List the matter on 17.08.2022.

14. Mr. Surat Singh will remain present in Court on the next date of hearing.

15. The documents presented before us by Mr. Singla have been handed over to him. Mr. Singla will get the said documents to Court on the next date of hearing.