Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (9) TMI 875

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gainst whom allegations have been made in the compliant that these are the persons who have committed offence under Section 135 of Act, 1962. In order to form opinion, prima facie, at this stage, Magistrate is supposed to look into the allegations contained in the complaint and the material placed along with it which in the present case include seizure memo, confessional statement of Vijay Kumar as well as statements of accused-revisionists which have been looked into by Magistrate and thereafter it has formed an opinion that a prima facie case has been made out, hence summons have been issued. Nothing has been placed to show that material available before Magistrate, even if believed to be true, no person of ordinary prudence can come to a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .2000 Customs Officers raided godown of M/s Patel Roadways on the basis of a specific information. Vijay Kumar Yadav, an employee of aforesaid Transport Company, was present there, who produced the key of godown to Officers. Search of godown was conducted in his presence as well as two independent witnesses, which resulted in recovery of 12 bales Chinese silk yarn. On demand, Vijay Kumar could not produce any document evidencing legal import and valid possession of aforesaid silk yarn. The recovered material and Vijay Kumar were brought to Custom office to complete seizure formalities. Vijay Kumar was asked to contact owner of goods to produce relevant import documents, but he told that goods are smuggled and papers concerning legal import .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t of ₹ 5000/- per month to Vijay Kumar, apart from monthly salary. He denied his involvement in smuggling activities in any manner. 6. Summons dated 15.03.2000 issued to Sona Sah, returned back undelivered, where after he was again summoned on 04.04.2000 but this time also summons returned back undelivered. Thereafter, stating that records and circumstances reveal that all the above named persons are knowingly involved in the offence of acquiring, concealing, carrying and dealing in the said contraband good and have contravened provision of Section 11 of Act, 1962 read with Notification No. 9 of 1996 dated 22.01.1996 which is punishable under Section 135 of Act, 1962, the aforesaid Complaint was lodged in the Court of SCJM. 7. T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er to form opinion, prima facie, at this stage, Magistrate is supposed to look into the allegations contained in the complaint and the material placed along with it which in the present case include seizure memo, confessional statement of Vijay Kumar as well as statements of accused-revisionists which have been looked into by Magistrate and thereafter it has formed an opinion that a prima facie case has been made out, hence summons have been issued. Nothing has been placed before us to show that material available before Magistrate, even if believed to be true, no person of ordinary prudence can come to a conclusion that even prima face no case of commission of offence by accused-revisionists under Section 135 of Act, 1962 is made out. The .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... upreme Court but the Court refused to interfere. 12. In the present case, that stage has not come inasmuch accused-revisionists have yet to appear before Magistrate and to plead their defence in one or other manner. 13. Another judgment relied on is State Vs. Mushtaq Ahmad and others 2016 (1) SCC 315, but that has arisen from a regular Trial. Trial Court convicted accused under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1985 ) but on appeal High Court converted conviction under Section 20(b)(ii)(B) of Act, 1985 whereafter matter went to Supreme Court, who upheld the decision of Trial Court. In the present case, trial has yet to commence. 14. Sri Rai also referred t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates