Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + Tri Indian Laws - 2022 (5) TMI Tri This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1581 - Tri - Indian LawsSeeking extension of suspension order - Smuggling - fraudulent export of Duty drawback - export of Red Sanders - HELD THAT:- The Department in agreement with CVC advise dated 28.12.2021 is in advance stage for sanction of prosecution under Prevention of Corruption Act and initiation of departmental proceedings against the applicant in fraudulent export of Duty drawback and export of Red Sanders cases. Further, departmental proceedings are contemplated in consultation with the CVC in case of systematic smuggling of restricted/prohibited goods through Cargo Shed of NSCBI, Airport, Kolkata booked by SIIB, Air Cargo Complex, Kolkata, Air Cargo Complex, NSCBI Airport, Kolkata during 2017 in consultation with CVC vide O.M. dated 01/05.10.2020. Considering the involvement of the applicant in smuggling activity, penalty of Rs. 10,00,000 under Section 112 (a) and 112 (b) and also Rs. 10,00,000 under Section 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 was imposed on the applicant. Sanction of Competent Authority for prosecuting the applicant under Customs Act, 1962 has been conveyed by Commissioner (Inv-Cus) to Commissioner of Customs(Prev.), Kolkata vide letter dated 07.01.2021. It is evident that the applicant is involved in various cases, including CBI and Vigilance. On completion of investigations, major penalty charge sheets are contemplated, not in one but in many cases. It brings us to the moot point that has been raised in this O.A., which is non-issuance of a charge sheet and continued suspension. Basically whether suspension of the applicant can be continued beyond 90 days, if no charge sheet has been issued. This subject matter has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Apex Court and also by the Hon'ble High Court in different cases. The Hon'ble Apex Court in Ajay Kumar Choudhary vs. Union of India through its Secretary & Anr. [2015 (6) TMI 592 - SUPREME COURT] has been primarily relied upon where it was held that Previous Constitution Benches have been reluctant to quash proceedings on the grounds of delay, and to set time limits to their duration. However, the imposition of a limit on the period of suspension has not been discussed in prior case law, and would not be contrary to the interests of justice. Furthermore, the direction of the Central Vigilance Commission that pending a criminal investigation departmental proceedings are to be held in abeyance stands superseded in view of the stand adopted by us. The judgments clearly hold that suspension can be continued depending upon gravity of offences. In the present case, the applicant is under investigation in various cases by the CBI and Vigilance organisation. His prosecution and also major penalty action is contemplated against him. The charges for which he is under investigation are of very serious nature and, therefore, his continued suspension does not call for any interference by this Tribunal. In view of completion of various investigations and recommendations of major penalty action, already available with the respondents, the respondents should endeavour to take further necessary action for issuance of charge sheet, if so decided, and consider all these aspects during the next Suspension Review Committee meeting - Application dismissed.
|