Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (2) TMI 479 - SUPREME COURT

2016 (2) TMI 479 - SUPREME COURT - 2016 (333) E.L.T. 204 (SC) - Smuggling of gold - exoneration of the respondent in the adjudication proceedings - It was submitted on behalf of the Department that the respondent had not joined investigation and as such the instant petition did not deserve any consideration and that there were not two Pramod Kumars but only one person having two addresses. The High Court by its judgment and order under appeal, allowed the petition and quashed Complaint No.66/1/9 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Gowda And Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ. JUDGMENT Uday U. Lalit, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 04.1.2011 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Crl. M.C. No.460 of 2009. 3. That the facts leading to the filing of this appeal are as under:- (A) On the basis of specific information, AIR Customs Officers (Preventive) at IGI Airport, New Delhi, on 09.07.1996 recovered and seized from meal trolleys of the aircraft of Lufthansa Airlines flight from Fran .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

old smuggled on earlier occasions. (B) Varyam Singh further stated that on 6.07.1996, Ranbeer Singh and he went to Dubai where the respondent delivered two packets of gold; that they went to Frankfurt; that in the flight from Frankfurt to Delhi with the help of Ranbeer Singh, he put both the packets in dry ice trays and as per prearrangement these packets were to be removed and delivered to him near Moti Bagh Gurudwara by the catering staff and that he had agreed to pay ₹ 50,000/- for this .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ment of the respondent could not be recorded as inspite of numerous summons, he did not cooperate with the investigating authorities and remained in hiding. (C) The Commissioner of Customs, Delhi accorded sanction on 04.09.1996 for the prosecution of the respondent, Varyam Singh, Ranbeer Singh and four others and accordingly Complaint No. 66/1/96 was filed in the Court of ACMM, New Delhi. The respondent was declared proclaimed offender by the Ld. ACMM, New Delhi in the subject case. (D) In the m .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the Customs Act, 1962, stated that he was shown the record of details of call charges of Mobile phone number 9811028643 obtained from Essar Cell Phone mobile phone services, that on 21.04.1996 and 27.04.1996 telephone calls were made to telephone number 6914037; that he had been told that telephone number 6914037 belonged to Shri Varyam Singh and was his residence number and who had been arrested for smuggling of 184 gold biscuits. On being asked about that he stated that neither did he know .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e to telephone number 6914037 belonging to Shri Varyam Singh as he did not know Shri Varyam Singh and his telephone number. (E) The aforesaid order dated 30.09.1999 was carried in appeal and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) vide his order dated 25.01.2008 set aside the penalty imposed on the respondent. The Appellate Authority was of the view that there were two persons having same name i.e. Pramod Kumar, one in Dubai and the second being the respondent and that beyond the statement of the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of Shri Varyam Singh alleging the involvement of the appellant and is not corroborated by the statement of any other person or by any documentary evidence. On the other hand the claim of the appellant that he had left India on 06.09.1994 and since then he has not visited India again is corroborated by the statements of various persons tendered under Section 108 of the Customs Act 1962 and also by documentary evidence i.e. copies of his passports. No other person involved in the case has mentio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ir, legal and based on facts and hence the penalty imposed on the appellant is hereby set aside. (F) Based on the observations and findings rendered in the aforesaid order dated 25.01.2008, a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code being Crl. M.C. No. 460 of 2009 was filed on behalf of the respondent in the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. It is relevant to note that in the petition itself two addresses of the respondent were given, one of Dubai and the other of Delhi. The aff .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. It was observed by the High Court as under:- The entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the respondent department against the petitioner is the same, that was before the Appellate Authority and since the Appellate Authority had considered the entire evidence and come to above conclusion, I consider that no useful purpose would be served by continuing with the prosecution against the petitioner before the trial court. 4. The exoneration of the respondent .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ctor of Customs in the proceedings under the Sea Customs Act? (ii) Whether under any circumstance the finding of the Collector of Customs that the 1st and 2nd accused are not proved to be guilty operated as in issue estoppel in the criminal case against those accused? 5. The observations of the court in respect of aforesaid questions were as under:- 8…… The rule laid down in that decision was adopted by this Court in Pritam Singh v. State of Punjab, and again in N.R. Ghose v. State .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

6. A subsequent three-Judge Bench in K.G. Premshankar v. Inspector of Police (2002) 8 SCC 87 considered the effect of the decision of a civil court on criminal proceedings and it was concluded as under:- 30…. What emerges from the aforesaid discussion is -(1) the previous judgment which is final can be relied upon as provided under Sections 40 to 43 of the Evidence Act; (2) in civil suits between the same parties, principle of res judicata may apply; (3) in a criminal case, Section 300 C .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hat is stated therein. 31. Further, the judgment, order or decree passed in a previous civil proceeding, if relevant, as provided under Sections 40 and 42 or other provisions of the Evidence Act then in each case, the court has to decide to what extent it is binding or conclusive with regard to the matter(s) decided therein…. 32. In the present case, the decision rendered by the Constitution Bench in M.S. Sheriff case would be binding, wherein it has been specifically held that no hard-an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

this Court in Radheshyam Kejriwal v. State of West Bengal and Another (2011) 3 SCC 581. In his dissenting opinion P. Sathasivam, J. (as the learned Chief Justice then was) concluded that there was nothing in Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 to indicate that a finding in adjudication is binding on a court in prosecution under Section 56 of Act or that the prosecution under Section 56 depended upon the result of the adjudication under the Act. C.K. Prasad J., speaking for the majority summed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

roceeding for criminal prosecution; (v) Adjudication proceedings by the Enforcement Directorate is not prosecution by a competent court of law to attract the provisions of Article 20(2) of the Constitution or Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; (vi) The finding in the adjudication proceedings in favour of the person facing trial for identical violation will depend upon the nature of finding: If the exoneration in adjudication proceedings is on technical ground and not on merit, prosec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version