The Delhi High Court has observed that, presence of a lawyer cannot be allowed to the petitioner at the time of questioning or examination by the GST officers.
The Petitioner moved to the Court under article 226 of the constitution of India read with section 482 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to not cause any physical, mental or verbal harassment to the petitioner during the pendency of the investigation.
The Petitioner submitted that, he apprehended that the respondent would cause physical, mental and/or verbal harassment to the petitioner as heard by him from various people who were recently summoned and detained by the respondent agency.
While relying on the case, Sudhir Gulati vs. UOI, 1998 (100) E.LT. 344 (Del), Justice Brijesh Sethi observed that, “the presence of a lawyer cannot be allowed at the time of examination of a person under the Customs Office. The petitioner in the present case has been summoned by the Officers under GST Act who are not Police Officers and who have been conferred with the power to summon any person whose attendance they consider necessary to give evidence or to produce a document. The presence of the lawyer, therefore, is not required during the examination of the petitioner as per the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Pool Pandi‟s case”.
Disposing of the Petition, the Court also said that, the apprehension of petitioner that he may be physically assaulted or manhandled is concerned, this Court is of the opinion that it is a well-settled law now that no inquiry/ investigating officer has a right to use any method which is not approved by law to extract information from a witness/ suspect during examination and in case it is so done, no one can be allowed to break the law with impunity and has to face the consequences of his action.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment
