Former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Kamal Nath has got a big relief from the Indore bench of the High Court. The PIL filed against him for the CD of the Honey Trap case has been rejected by the court. The court said that the political statement of a politician cannot be taken seriously. The petitioner filed a petition on the basis of reports published in the newspapers.
Former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Kamal Nath. File photo
Former Chief Minister Kamal Nath has got a big relief from the Indore bench of the High Court regarding the CD of the famous Honey Trap case of Madhya Pradesh. The PIL filed against him was rejected by the court on Thursday. The petition filed by Advocate Bhupendrasinh Kushwaha stated that Nath himself said in an interview that he had a CD of the Honey Trap case.
It was demanded that Nath be ordered to make CDs available to SIT. Rejecting the petition, the court said that the petitioner has filed a petition on the basis of reports published in the newspapers. The political statement of a politician cannot be taken seriously.
Here… it will take time to settle the case, saying that no one can snatch the opportunity of examining by anyone.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reprimanded CGST in the case of taking decision in the case without giving the opportunity of examination. The court ordered the CGST to re -hear the case and give an opportunity for the examination.
Advocate Piyush Parashar said that CGST had passed an order against the paper trade link in 2023. In this, a recovery of Rs 3.78 crore of CGST and SGST was taken on the company. During the hearing of the case, the opportunity to examine the witnesses was not given.
The company filed a petition in the High Court
The company raised this repeatedly, but every time it was rejected by saying that it would take time to resolve the case. The company filed a petition in the High Court on this. The company told the court that according to the principle of natural justice, they were to be given the opportunity to examine the witnesses, which was not found.
The court, after hearing the arguments of all the parties, said that the appellant should be given an opportunity to debate and witnesses. The court canceling the order issued in January 2023 and said that he should hear the case again.
