Desk of CA. Praveen Sharma – 940 Series (CAPS) 

Karnataka High Court – Procedural Fairness in GST Prosecution

The Karnataka High Court recently dealt with a procedural issue arising in a GST prosecution involving allegations of fake invoice transactions.

The accused had challenged an order of the Trial Magistrate dated 15.11.2025. During the complainant’s examination as PW-1, the defence raised an objection when the complainant referred to certain technical details, including the TIN number, mentioned in the original complaint. The Magistrate overruled the objection, observing that the complainant was also the Investigating Officer and could refer to the complaint while deposing.

The accused argued before the High Court that allowing such reference was improper and prejudicial, especially since the matter was at the stage of recording evidence prior to framing of charges.

After hearing both sides, the High Court clarified an important procedural principle. It held that an Investigating Officer must certainly depose based on the investigation conducted by him. However, he is not expected to reproduce every technical or documentary detail purely from memory. Where documents are already part of the record and have been supplied to the accused, limited reference to such documents during deposition is permissible.

The Court further observed that once cognizance is taken, the complaint forms part of the record and can be looked into for reference purposes. Expecting a witness to remember complex numerical or technical particulars without referring to the record would be unrealistic.

Accordingly, the High Court found no illegality in the Magistrate’s order and declined to interfere.

LINK:CA. Praveen Sharma on Linkedin

Regards
CAPS