IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31403 of 2008(L) --------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- DEEPAK KUMAR VANJANI, PROPRIETOR, M/S.VARUN ENTERPRISES, METRO TOWERS, CONVENT ROAD, OPP.SHENOYS THEATRE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.BOBBY JOHN & SRI.TOMSON T. EMMANUEL. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, SQUAD-IV, COMMERCIAL TAXES, O/O DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (INTELLIGENCE) ERNAKULAM. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KVAT CIRCLE III, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI C.K. GOVINDAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 31403 OF 2008 L -------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th November, 2008 JUDGMENT The Writ Petition is filed with the following prayers: “(i) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 1st respondent to release the records of the petitioner recovered as per Ext.P3 SIR expeditiously within a time limit fixed by this Honourable Court. (ii) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 1st respondent to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 notice till the release of records recovered as per Ext.P3 SIR and one month thereafter.” 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Complaint of petitioner is regarding the detention of the purchase bills and business slips which were recovered in the course of an inspection on 25.6.2004. According to petitioner, he sought release of the documents. But, notice was issued alleging failure to keep true WPC.31403/08 L 2 and correct Accounts for the year 2004 - 2005. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had approached the first respondent pointing out the factum of non-release of the records, and that production of complete records is possible only after release of the recovered purchase bills and business slips. Ext.P4 is the said notice. Learned counsel for petitioner also relied on decisions of this Court to contend that it is the duty of the first respondent to return the seized documents even without a request within a maximum period of sixty days unless the documents are required for prosecution. Learned Government Pleader points out that the business slips and purchase bills were taken. It is pointed out that the petitioner was called upon to produce records on several occasions, and the petitioner sought time for production of the records. 3. Retention of the documents, is a matter governed by the provisions of law. The maximum period provided by law has already expired. In such circumstances, the detention of the records may not be justified. Even though the petitioner relied WPC.31403/08 L 3 on a decision of this Court in Ramanujam v. Intelligence Officer (1995 (2) KLT SN 13 Case No.14), I do not think that it can be applied fully to the facts of this case, as the learned counsel for the petitioner himself said that the case is related to non- production of Accounts. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to release the detained purchase bills and business slips recovered from the petitioner as per Ext.P3 SIR within a maximum period of two weeks from today. Sd/= K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge