Quashing of unsustainable prosecution after assessments and penalty orders were set aside, with writ relief allowed

Assessment and penalty orders having been set aside, the Department accepted that prosecution was not maintainable at present. On that admitted position, the Kerala HC held that the complaint could not be kept pending merely because fresh assessments might be made later, and that extraordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 could be used to prevent continuation of an unsustainable prosecution. The Court further noted that procedural technicalities should not bar relief where maintainability was admittedly absent. The prosecution proceedings were quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether prosecution proceedings could be sustained when the assessments and penalty orders had been set aside and the Department admitted that prosecution would not lie at present, and whether the High Court could quash the complaint under its writ jurisdiction instead of relegating the petitioners to the magistrate's court.

Analysis: The assessment and penalty orders stood set aside, and on that footing the Department accepted that prosecution was not maintainable at present. In those circumstances, the complaint could not be allowed to remain pending merely because fresh assessments might be made later. The High Court held that its extraordinary jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 could be invoked to prevent an admitted continuation of an unsustainable prosecution, and that procedural technicalities should not obstruct relief where the complaint was admittedly not maintainable.

Conclusion: The prosecution proceedings were quashed.

---