2022 (4) TMI 123 - HC - GST

Court Stays Supplementary Complaint Proceedings After Finding Potential Abuse of Process Despite Petitioners' Cooperation With Investigation

The HC stayed proceedings related to a supplementary complaint dated 23.04.2021, finding it potentially an abuse of process. The Court determined that ... Validity of subsequent complaint - legal fetter to submit a supplementary report after filing of the first report or not - HELD THAT:- During existence of the first complaint, filing the second complaint under the nomenclature of supplementary report is not permissible under law. The apprehension of the accused-petitioner that in the garb of the subsequent complaint, again efforts would be made to make search, seizure and to affect the arrest of the accused; is appears to be well founded in view of filing the complaint by declaring the accused as an absconder. When the facts manifestly reflecting that the petitioners have not made abscondance, they challenged the proceedings by way of filing the writ petition before the Division Bench and thereafter appeared before the agency, thoroughly interrogated and their statements have been recorded, still thereafter, filing the complaint by taking resort of Section 299 of Cr.P.C. prima facie appears to be perfunctory. The matter requires serious consideration - Put up on 28.03.2022. Issues:Challenge to submission of supplementary complaint dated 23.04.2021 in the Court of learned Special Judge (NDPS Cases), Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur.Analysis:The petitioners challenged the initiation of proceedings and issuance of a warrant of arrest based on a criminal complaint filed earlier. A Division Bench of the Court passed an order on 25.03.2021, providing interim protection to the petitioners. The petitioners appeared before the Investigating Authorities as directed by the Division Bench. However, the petitioners contended that the subsequent supplementary complaint was filed to defeat the Division Bench's order and was an abuse of the legal process. The respondent authorities argued that the supplementary report was submitted due to the petitioners' lack of cooperation in the investigation.Analysis:The Court considered the legality of filing a supplementary report while the first complaint was still pending. The Court noted that the petitioners had cooperated with the investigation, and there was no evidence of abscondance. The Court found the filing of the supplementary complaint under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. to be potentially perfunctory and an abuse of process. The Court expressed concern that the subsequent complaint might lead to further search, seizure, and arrest attempts, despite the petitioners' compliance with the Division Bench's order and their cooperation during interrogation.Analysis:The Court admitted the petition for further consideration and stayed proceedings related to the supplementary complaint dated 23.04.2021. The petitioners were directed to cooperate with the agency regarding the first complaint dated 21.02.2021. The Court scheduled the matter for the next hearing on 28.03.2022. The Court emphasized the importance of the petitioners' cooperation with the agency in connection with the initial complaint and expressed the need for a thorough examination of the situation.