Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
L.Victoria Gowri, J
M/s.Sree Aravind Steels Limited – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise I Division – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial jurisdiction and procedural framework. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding right to evidence and necessity for sanction. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. counterarguments on trial procedures and evidentiary value. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. independence of adjudication and prosecution clarified by law. (Para 10) |
ORDER
The present Criminal Revision Case is filed, challenging the order dated 18.06.2025, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichirappalli, in Criminal M.P.No.12824 of 2025 in C.C. No.5 of 2009, whereby the petition filed by the complainant/Assistant Commissioner, GST and Central Excise, Trichirappalli, under Sections 294 r/w 173(5) Cr.P.C., 1973, seeking permission to mark the order-in-original dated 09.08.2023 as an additional document was allowed. The revision petitioners herein are Accused Nos.1 and 3 in C.C. No.5 of 2009.
2. It is submitted by both the counsels that the 3rd respondent did not participate in the trial in Criminal M.P.No.12824 of 2025 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Trichirappalli. That apart, he is only the General Manager of the 2nd respondent company and he is not a necessary party to this case. Memo has also bee
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
