Heard Sri Neeralgi Jeevanbabu Jagadish, learned standing counsel is present before the court physically and representing the petitioner-Superintendent of Central Tax, Bangalore South Commissionerate.

This petition is initiated by the responsible Authority of Central Tax against the respondent namely Syed Sardar Pasha. The petitioner namely Mr.Aslam Pasha Azeez has filed Crl.Misc.No.5876/2019 against the respondent- Superintendent of Central Tax, Bangalore South Commissionerate, under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., for seeking relief of bail on the ground of apprehension of arrest by the respondent -Central Tax Authority for the alleged offences under Section 70 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 r/w Section 14 of the Central Excise Act, 1994 and Section 83 of the Finance Act, 1994.

2. Subsequent to filing of the aforesaid petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., the court of Civil and Sessions Judge had allowed the petition by assigning reasons and consequently, conditions have been imposed, which are incorporated in the operative portion of the order. This order has been passed in Crl.Misc.No.5875/2019. The court having the jurisdiction has allowed the petitions by imposing stipulated conditions Nos.1 to 5.

3. But, in this petition, the petitioner-Superintendent of Central Tax, Bangalore South Commissionerate by urging various grounds seeking for setting aside the order passed by the court below in Crl.Misc.No.5875/2019 dated 07.08.2019. The petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail on the apprehension of arrest by the Central Tax Authority and in the event of arrest by the Authority, the petitioner shall be released on bail by complying the stipulated conditions as indicated in the order itself. There is no violation of any condition or even disobedience of the order. Unless there is any violation of conditions, it cannot arise for exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for intervention in the impugned order passed by the court below in Crl.Misc.No.5875/2019, even in any other provision of law, unless some violation.

4. These are the discretionary power which has to be exercised by the court having jurisdiction, keeping in view the extra care to protect the personal life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. But exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., in the instant case, does not arise for setting aside the order passed by the court below in Crl.Misc.No.5875/2019 dated 07.08.2019.

5. Though, the petition is slated for removing of office objection, but challenging the impugned order passed by the court below only for granting of bail by allowing the petition under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., by imposing certain conditions and the court below has been exercising discretionary power.

6. Therefore, in this petition, it does not call for intervention for setting aside the impugned order passed by the court below and even does not arise for issuance of notice against the respondent-Syed Sardar Pasha who is arrayed as petitioner in Crl.Misc.No.5875/2019 filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. However, liberty is always reserved to the petitioner- Superintendent of Central Tax, Bangalore South Commissionerate to proceed further against the respondent in accordance with law, if there is any violation of conditions imposed by the court below.

Accordingly, in terms of the aforesaid reasons, this petition is hereby disposed of.