TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 1343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irpal is hit by the principles of double jeopardy and is liable to be quashed. CBI recorded statements of some of the witnesses under Section 108 of the Act which are admissible in evidence. Therefore, it is not possible to pre-judge the case before the trial. The complaint was previously filed at Amritsar Court. It was returned and after one year, it was filed at Jalandhar Court. Let the petitioner Pavitar Singh take a plea regarding bar of limitation for offence under Section 132 of the Act and let the lower Court decide the same. In the quashing petition, it is not possible to critically appreciate evidence, which is yet to be produced before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - CRM-M No. 24662 of 2011 (O&M) and CRM-M No. 8949 of 2014 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 31-5-2016 - Kuldip Singh, J. Shri K.S. Dadwal and S.S. Narula, Advocates, for the Petitioner. Shri D.D. Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER By this single judgment I shall dispose of CRM-M No. 24662 of 2011 and CRM-M No. 8949 of 2014. Facts of the case are extracted from CRM-M No. 24662 of 2011. 2. Petitioners have sought quashi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... im and these were personally submitted by him in the office of JDGFT Ludhiana. Ashok Kumar and Gurkirpal Singh made Satbir Singh to sign blank cheque books of the OBC, Jalandhar and State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Jalandhar. He further disclosed that he had visited Dubai in June, 2000 and carried US $ 25000 along with him and gave this money to Ashok Kumar who received him at Dubai Airport. It was further stated that Ashok Kumar used to fill in the columns of the BRCs after getting it signed by him in blank. He further disclosed that all the DEPBs were obtained from JDGFT, Ludhiana by Ashok Kumar and Gurkirpal Singh from his office. The invoice numbers were also disclosed. He further disclosed that some of the DEPBs bear his signatures and other DEPBs are forged by Ashok Kumar. Statement of Pavitar Singh was also recorded. Statement of other accused were also recorded and ultimately, it was established that Ashok Kumar, Pavitar Singh, Satbir Singh, Vijay Madan and Gurkirpal Singh have violated the provisions of Sections 132 and 135 of the Act and that they have also submitted forged/false export documents by way of substitution and forgery of BRCs for fraudulently obtaining the D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 30-3-2013 under Sections 120B IPC read with Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and has been accordingly sentenced. Appeal against the conviction is pending before this Court. Therefore, for the same offence, he cannot be tried and convicted twice. 8. First of all, I will take up the case of Gurkirpal Singh. The perusal of the judgment of the learned Special Judge, CBI Court shows that allegations levelled against the present petitioners are that they falsely shown the export of high valued items and obtained DEPB after forging some documents. Allegations of corruption against the officials of the Custom Department were also there. It is stated that with the help of forged and fictitious documents, they obtained DEPB amounting to ₹ 1,70,80,314. The perusal of the complaint also shows that almost similar allegations have been levelled regarding submitting false documents and procuring DEPB and cheating the department of ₹ 1.85 crore. The Custom Department filed a complaint under Sections 132 and 135 of the Act against various accused, including Gurkirpal Singh whereas CBI also lodged an FIR and pre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 97 or of section 188 of this Code. Explanation. - The dismissal of a complaint, or the discharge of the accused, is not an acquittal for the purposes of this section. 11. To properly appreciate the factual position, Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 are reproduced as under :- 132. False declaration, false documents, etc . - Whoever makes, signs or uses, or causes to be made, signed or used, any declaration, statement or document in the transaction of any business relating to the customs, knowing or having reason to believe that such declaration, statement or document is false in any material particular, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both. SECTION 135. Evasion of duty or prohibitions. - (1) Without prejudice to any action that may be taken under this Act, if any person - (a) is in relation to any goods in any way knowingly concerned in misdeclaration of value or in any fraudulent evasion or attempt at evasion of any duty chargeable thereon or of any prohibition for the time being imposed under this Act or any other law for the time being in force with respect to such goods; or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ceeding under this Act, other than a prosecution, the accused has been ordered to pay a penalty or the goods which are the subject matter of such proceedings have been ordered to be confiscated or any other action has been taken against him for the same act which constitutes the offence; (iii) the fact that the accused was not the principal offender and was acting merely as a carrier of goods or otherwise was a secondary party to the commission of the offence; (iv) the age of the accused. 12. Perusal of the said sections show that offence under Section 132 of the Act pertains to false declaration and false documents in the transactions of the business relating to customs and Section 135 of the Acts relates to evasion of customs duty. 13. In the CBI case against Gurkirpal Singh, allegations under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC were also levelled alleging that he has done cheating by evading customs duty to the extent of ₹ 1.85 crores and has prepared forged documents. Therefore, charges are substantially same for which accused Gurkirpal has already tried, convicted and sentenced. Therefore, present complaint against Gurkirpal is hit by the principles of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
