Page 73 - GSTL_ 28th May 2020_Vol 36_Part 4

2020 ] PARESH NATHALAL CHAUHAN v. STATE OF GUJARAT 519
perusal of this court. In terms of the panchnama, on 11-10-2019, in the afternoon,
the officers searched the residential premises of the petitioner; and the books of
accounts and other documents which they found were brought to the main
room, which included the bank passbooks and cheque books, etc. of the family
members. At about 4:02 pm, the officers asked the parents of the petitioner to
present the petitioner; whereupon they had made a phone call to him and stated
that he was not picking up the phone. Thereafter, they recorded statements of the
parents of the petitioner in question-answer form. It is recorded in the panchna-
ma that at 4:45 pm, upon asking the mother of the dealer (petitioner) to keep the
dealer present and upon making her to listen the recording of her phone call, she
behaved in an inappropriate way and said that every mother lies to protect her
son and that even if she lies, what is wrong with it. It is further recorded that the
dealer’s mother, in his presence as well as in the presence of panchas and offic-
ers, said that every person sitting there must have done something wrong. Thus,
the dealer’s mother conduct was uncooperative. At 5:14 pm it is recorded that
Alpesh Wadher of Hollywood Shoes having remained present, a team with one
officer and panchas set off to the dealer’s shop for investigation. At 6:10 pm, it is
recorded that the officer along with the panchas returned and they had brought
along with them pass-books related to the bank and Shri H.T. Barad an officer of
the office was informed about the documents which were found there. It is fur-
ther recorded that an expert was called to obtain a mirror image of the calls made
from the phone of the petitioner’s mother, which was found at the said premises
and a master copy thereof was prepared in a Sandisk Pen Drive 16 GB, which
was sealed in the presence of panchas and a working copy was made in a pen
drive. At 7:10 pm it is recorded that the petitioner’s father and mother informed
that they wanted to visit a friend of their son in case they can get any information
from there and hence, they had asked permission to go there and hence, they had
taken the petitioner’s daughter and panchas with them and gone near Jivraj Park
where her maternal uncle (maternal aunt’s husband) Hareshbhai Vandhra was
residing and he informed that on that day in the morning at 9:00 am, Pareshbhai
Chauhan had come to him to take a bag which he had given. Thereafter, he did
not have any contact with him and if he is able to contact him in any manner, he
would try to bring him home. At 8:05 pm, it is recorded that during the course of
search for the dealer, the dealer’s mother was not feeling well and had stated that
on account of tension her entire body was aching and hence, they had informed
an officer there to take her to the hospital along with panchas, whereupon she
had refused to go and had said that she was worried that her son may take a
wrong step. At 8:45 pm it is recorded that at the dealer’s place the statement of
his mother in question - answer form and the statement in question - answer
form of Alpesh Wadher who was running Hollywood Shoes was recorded.
[Thus, despite the fact that the petitioner’s mother, an elderly lady, was suffering
from ill health at 8:05 pm, her statement came to be recorded by 8:45 pm.] At 9:35
pm it is recorded that another officer came to relieve the officer who was present
at the premises and he was acquainted with the proceedings conducted through-
out the day and was told that in case the dealer comes at night, his statement
should be recorded.
16.1 At 9:15 on the next morning, it is recorded that at night, the family
members again tried to contact the dealer on his mobile phone, but his phone
was found to be switched off. Thereafter, the family members were again inter-
GST LAW TIMES  28th May 2020  73