Full Text
Translation output
16&17
% 08.06.2011
Present: Mr. Satish Aggarwal, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ivir.Vipin Kumar Gupta with Ms. Seema Raghav, Advocates for the Respondent
CrI.
M.A. No.6714/2011 (exemption) in CrI.M.C. No. 1877 /
2011)
Allowed subject to just exceptions.
+ CrI.M.C. NO.1877/2011 & CrI. |V|.A. 6713/2011 fstav)
+ CrI. M.C. 1938/2011 & CrI. M.A. 6881/2011 (stay)
* Issue notice.
Mr. Gupta accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
With the consent of counsels for the parties, the petitions are taken up for final disposal.
These are the petitions filed by the Central Excise Department seeking setting aside of order dated 19.05.2011 whereby interim protection was granted to the respondent and also the Central
Excise Department was called upon to clarify as to whether respondent would be treated as an accused or a witness.
Mr. Aggarwal who appears for Central Excise Department submits that he is aggrieved by the aforementioned directions in view of the fact, at this stage, only a summon under section 14 of the Central Excise Act has been issued to the respondent. Iam also informed by Mr. Aggarwal that impugned order dated 19.05.2011 enures to the benefit of the respondent till 06.06.2011, which at the request of the respondent has been extended till 10.06.2011.
CrI.M.C. NO.1877/2011 S, CrI. M.C. 1938/2011 pgge i of 2
2011:DHC:11359
Mr.Gupta who appears for the respondent says that no request was made on behalf of the respondent, however, the direction does continue till 10.06.2011. Learned counsels for both parties submits that no further orders are necessitated in the present petitions if the following directions are issued
(i). the Ld. ASJ shall dispose ofthe application pending before him for anticipatory bail on the next date i.e., 10.06.2011; and
(ii). there shall be no insistence, at this stage, by the court to clarify as to whether the respondent is to arraigned as an accused or, cited as a witness.
It is ordered accordingly. Needless to say that Ld. ASJ shall pass a reasoned order. It is further clarified that the Ld. ASJ, at this stage, need not seek any clarification from the Central Excise
Department, as indicated hereinabove, qua the respondent.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Dasti under the signatures ofthe Court Master to the parties.
JUNE 08, 2011 yg
RAJIV SHAKDHER,J
(Vacation Judge)
CrI.M.C. NO.1877/2011 &CrI. M.C. 1938/2011 pggg 2of 2
2011:DHC:11359
% 08.06.2011
Present: Mr. Satish Aggarwal, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ivir.Vipin Kumar Gupta with Ms. Seema Raghav, Advocates for the Respondent
CrI.
M.A. No.6714/2011 (exemption) in CrI.M.C. No. 1877 /
2011)
Allowed subject to just exceptions.
+ CrI.M.C. NO.1877/2011 & CrI. |V|.A. 6713/2011 fstav)
+ CrI. M.C. 1938/2011 & CrI. M.A. 6881/2011 (stay)
* Issue notice.
Mr. Gupta accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
With the consent of counsels for the parties, the petitions are taken up for final disposal.
These are the petitions filed by the Central Excise Department seeking setting aside of order dated 19.05.2011 whereby interim protection was granted to the respondent and also the Central
Excise Department was called upon to clarify as to whether respondent would be treated as an accused or a witness.
Mr. Aggarwal who appears for Central Excise Department submits that he is aggrieved by the aforementioned directions in view of the fact, at this stage, only a summon under section 14 of the Central Excise Act has been issued to the respondent. Iam also informed by Mr. Aggarwal that impugned order dated 19.05.2011 enures to the benefit of the respondent till 06.06.2011, which at the request of the respondent has been extended till 10.06.2011.
CrI.M.C. NO.1877/2011 S, CrI. M.C. 1938/2011 pgge i of 2
2011:DHC:11359
Mr.Gupta who appears for the respondent says that no request was made on behalf of the respondent, however, the direction does continue till 10.06.2011. Learned counsels for both parties submits that no further orders are necessitated in the present petitions if the following directions are issued
(i). the Ld. ASJ shall dispose ofthe application pending before him for anticipatory bail on the next date i.e., 10.06.2011; and
(ii). there shall be no insistence, at this stage, by the court to clarify as to whether the respondent is to arraigned as an accused or, cited as a witness.
It is ordered accordingly. Needless to say that Ld. ASJ shall pass a reasoned order. It is further clarified that the Ld. ASJ, at this stage, need not seek any clarification from the Central Excise
Department, as indicated hereinabove, qua the respondent.
With the aforesaid direction, the writ petitions are disposed of.
Dasti under the signatures ofthe Court Master to the parties.
JUNE 08, 2011 yg
RAJIV SHAKDHER,J
(Vacation Judge)
CrI.M.C. NO.1877/2011 &CrI. M.C. 1938/2011 pggg 2of 2
2011:DHC:11359
JUDGMENT