L \/ ELHI $-* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW D 33. + W.P.(O No.5855 of 2010 B D PLYWOOD ..... petitioner . Through: Mr.R.K. Saini, Advocate. VETSUS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Anand, Advocate. WITH W.P.(O No.5857 of 2010 \[iS. SINGHAL TRADERS ..... petitioner Through: Mr.R.K. Saini, Advocate. VCISUS THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Anand, Advocate. AIID 34. + >, 35. + IWS. NAND soNS TIMBER TRADERS ..... petitioner Through: Mr.R.K. Saini, Advocate. ly.P.(C) Nos. 5855 S8S7 & SSSB of2010 page r/3 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified I VETSUS TI{E DIRECTOR GENERAL OF CENTRAL EXCISE & ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Mukesh Anand, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 09.09.2010 w.P.(c) Nos. 5855. 5857 & 5858 of 2010 & cM Nos. 11526. 11529 & 11530 of 2010 (for stav) 1. Mr. Mukesh Anand, learned counsel appearing for the Respondents states that the goods which were seized have been released to each of the Petitioners but the originals of the documents have been retained for further investigations. Mr. Saini's grievance is that in W.P. (C) 5855 of 2010 the notice dated 25th March 2010 indicates that one IWs. Shobit Plywood P Industries and not the Petitioner is being investigated. It is submitted since the Petitioner is only called to attend the inquiry as a witness it is not justified on the part of the Department to retain the original documents and books of accounts of the Petitioner. The plea in the other fwo writ petitions is similar. 2. \/k. Anand states that the investigations are still in progress. It cannot be stated with certainty yet that the Petitioners are only witnesses. The W.P.(C) l{os. 5855, 5857 & 5858 of 2010 page 2/3 t ! \.4 \ completion of investigation will clariff that status. He submits that it will \e open to the Petitioner to make photocopies of all the documents and books of accounts. However the originals will have to be retained by the Respondent till the investigations are completed. 3. In view of the above submissions, this Court directs that each of the Petitioners will be permitted to obtain photocopies of the documents seized from them by the Respondent. The originals will be retained by the Respondent only till the investigations are concluded. Since five months have already elapsed since the seizures, the investigations are directed to be completed within five months from today. If the originals of the seized documents are retained beyond five months, it will be open to the ?etitioners to again apply for directions. 4. The writ petitions and the applications are disposed of. 5. Order dasti to learned counsel for the parties. S. MURALIDHA& J SEPTEMBER 09, 2O1O dn |V.P.(C) Nos. 5855, 5857 & 5858 of2010 P poge 3/3