2008 (11) TMI 203 - HC - Customs

Reward to informers - It is not in dispute that as per respondent/writ petitioner s information 99 silver bars were recovered from the same very vessel AL-KARA in the manner as it was informed. In fact no document was placed before learned single Judge to show that any information was received prior to receipt of information on 9th April 1991 from the respondent/writ petitioner who has given detailed and accurate information which was forwarded to the 4th appellant by letter dated 9th April 1991. It has not been disputed that the 4th respondent has not received the said letter dated 9th April 1991 whereby gist of information was forwarded to him. - reward is payable as per circular dated 7th June 1988

Summary

Issues:
1. Reward payable to informers providing advance information to Revenue intelligence of Excise and Customs Department.

Analysis:
The case involves a writ petition filed by the 1st respondent seeking the payment of a reward as per a circular dated 7th June, 1988, for providing advance information about a smuggling activity involving 99 silver bars. The High Court, in the impugned order, directed the appellants to pay the reward based on the information provided by the respondent. The Union of India and Revenue authorities filed an appeal against this decision.

The matter primarily revolves around the factual aspect of the case rather than a legal question. The 1st respondent, a registered informer of the Customs Department, provided detailed information about the smuggling activity in April 1991. This information led to the interception of the vessel carrying the contraband. The respondent claimed a reward for his accurate information, but no action was taken initially. Despite recommendations for the reward amount, there was no response from the concerned authorities.

The High Court considered the guidelines related to granting rewards for information to government servants in cases of seizures. It was noted that the seizure made on 19th June, 1991, was based on the information provided by the respondent in April 1991, as evidenced by the correspondence between the parties. The seizure details matched the information provided by the respondent, and the Court found that the reward claim was justified based on the accurate information furnished.

The Court highlighted that the information provided by the respondent was crucial in leading to the seizure of the contraband. The authorities involved in receiving the information did not dispute the accuracy of the details provided by the respondent. The Court emphasized that the timing of the interception of the vessel did not invalidate the accuracy of the information provided by the respondent. The documents on record supported the respondent's claim, and no evidence was presented to contradict the sequence of events as narrated by the respondent.

Ultimately, the Court upheld the decision of the learned single Judge to allow the writ petition, dismissing the appeal by the Union of India and Revenue authorities. The Court found no grounds to interfere with the order and ruled in favor of the respondent. No costs were awarded in the matter.