KIRAN L JOSHI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. Bhargav Hasurkar for the applicant and learned APP Ms. M.D. Mehta for the respondent-State.

(2.) By way of this application the applicant prays for quashing of the FIR being C.R. No.I-68 of 2014 registered with Gandhidham 'A' Division Police Station, District East Kutch, on 13/3/2014, for offences punishable under Ss. 420 , 406 , 465 , 467 , 468 , 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and Ss. 44, 45, 85(1)(Chh) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr. Hasurkar for the applicant would submit that the said FIR has been filed by the respondent No.2 herein who was officer of Sales Tax Department and whereas the said FIR had been lodged in connection with the principal accused, having submitted false and forged documents to the Bank concerned, on account of which the attachment, under Sec. 45(1) of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, with regard to the Bank Account of the main accused, had been de-freezed by the present applicant. Learned Advocate Mr. Hasurkar would submit that the applicant at the relevant point of time was working as Branch Manager, Bank of Maharashtra, Gandhidham Branch, and whereas a copy of an order dtd. 19/10/2013 had been served upon him, which was purportedly signed by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Vigilance) Ahmedabad, Gujarat State. Learned Advocate would submit that the said communication/order inter alia informs the Bank that the dealer concerned one M/s Somnath International, had cleared their Assessment and Dues, and therefore the Bank was requested to release the attachment with regard to Bank Account of the said M/s Somnath International. Learned Advocate would submit that since the applicant as the Bank Manager, had no reason to doubt the said communication which also contain the Seal of Sales Tax Department, Ahmedabad, therefore, the applicant had released the attachment and whereas it appears that upon the attachment being released by the Bank on 26/10/2013, and whereas the Firm concerned had transferred the amount of Rs.16,91,000.00 to another Account and whereas balance of an amount of Rs.5,025.00 was remaining. It appears that upon such amount being transferred, the Sales Tax Department, had inquired into this aspect and whereas the Department, had thereafter filed the impugned FIR. Learned Advocate Mr. Hasurkar would submit that while initially, the applicant after having approached this Court had been protected to the extent of no coercive steps being taken against the applicant, later on, vide an order dtd. 9/4/2019, interim relief in terms of staying of investigation had been granted in his favour, which interim relief, according to the learned Advocate Mr. Hasurkar, is continuing till date. Learned Advocate would further submit that while insofar as the present applicant is concerned, the investigation has not proceeded and whereas pendency of the FIR has gravely prejudiced the present applicant since inspite of retiring, the Bank has not released some of the retiral dues of the present applicant. Learned Advocate would further submit that as such, there is nothing in the FIR which would show that the present applicant, was acting in connivance with the other accused. Learned Advocate would reiterate that as such, the applicant was in receipt of the letter/communication, copy of which is also annexed with the application, and according to the learned Advocate, a prima facie perusal of the said letter, would show that the said letter carries all the implications of being an official letter including sign and seal of the Assessment Commissioner of Commercial Tax (Vigilance) Ahmedabad and seal of the Sales Tax Department, Ahmedabad, and the said letter being upon the Letterhead of the Gujarat Commercial Tax Department. Learned Advocate would submit that as a Bank Manager the present applicant had no reason to disbelieve or question the said letter and whereas, the applicant had acted strictly in accordance with law and whereas there being no material to link the present applicant to the crime in question. Thus submitting learned Advocate Mr. Hasurkar would request that the impugned FIR may be quashed by this Court.