Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2016 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (5) TMI 298 - HC - CustomsOffence under Section 132 & 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 - illegal import of electronic goods - Circular No.27 of 2015-Customs dated 23.10.2015 - Appellant submitted that trial Court had committed an error in not appreciating the vital fact that the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate can very well drop the proceedings at the instance of the Accused. Also failed to take into consideration the Circular No.27 of 2015 with retrospective effect issued by the Union Ministry of Finance dated 23.10.2015. Also failed to take into account that the 'Criminal Prosecution' and 'Adjudication Proceedings' are independent in nature and the finding rendered in the ' Adjudication Proceedings 'does not bind the parties facing Criminal Prosecution. Held that:- the Petitioner had not preferred any 'Appeal' as against the Adjudication Order dated 17.04.2010, wherein the penalty of ₹ 1,50,000/- was imposed on him. The said order has become final, conclusive and binding between the parties. Also that, the Circular No.27 of 2015-Customs, dated 23.10.2015 of the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, does not point out expressly that payment of penalty imposed upon a person in Adjudication Proceeding is a condition precedent for 'withdrawal of prosecution' by the Respondent/complainant. In the present case, for nearly six years, the Respondent/complainant had not filed any complaint before the Competent Court, not withstanding the fact that in terms of Customs Act, 1962, the prosecution must not be imposed any one in respect of offences covered under Sections viz., 132, 133, 134, 135A or 1136 of the Customs Act, 1962. It is for the 'Appropriate Authority' to take into consideration of the nature of the offence, the role of the individual concerned and evidence available on record to substantiate the guilty mind of the person for launching prosecution. It is to be noted that Section 132 of the Customs Act is a Bailable one. Further, the offence under Section 135 of the Act is a compoundable one, in terms of Section 137(3) of the Customs Act. The spirit and tenor of the guidelines issued for launching the prosecution, procedure for withdrawal of prosecution, procedure for withdrawal of sanction order, procedure for withdrawal of complaint already filed for prosecution, etc., were not evaluated/appreciated and looked into in a proper and real perspective by the trial Court which has resulted in dismissal of the said Miscellaneous Petition. Therefore, this Court, to secure the ends of justice and in furtherance of substantial cause of justice, at this stage without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, sets aside the impugned order. Consequently, the Revision succeeds. - Revision petition allowed
|