9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 542X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judgment dated 16.06.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge (hereinafter referred to as the "Writ Court") in writ petitions bearing OWP Nos. 251/2015 & 1110/2015 filed by the petitioner-appellant herein, as identical questions of law are involved in both the appeals having been dealt with, by the learned Writ Court. 2. One consignment of Pashmina Embroidered Ladies Shawls vide shipping bill No. 8685517 dated 28.11.2013 were presented for clearance for export to Switzerland on 02.12.2013 to Customs Authorities at IGI Airport, New Delhi and on examination by the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (Northern Region), New Delhi, it was observed that out of 33 shawls, 20 shawls appeared to be mixture of Shahtoosh and the fact as to whether the goods contained objectionable yarn or not, the shawls were sent for forensic test. The Regional Deputy Director, Wildlife Crime Control Bureau vide its letter No. 10-10/WN/14/325 dated 29.05.2014 certified that all suspected twenty pieces of shawls contained hair of Tibetan Antelope (Pantholopes Hodgsoni), which was prohibited, as there was reason that they were liable for confiscation under the Act, as such, those shawls were seized in terms of Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er Airway Bill No. 1545575738 from Srinagar; that the consignment was to be delivered in Switzerland within a period of one week, however, due to non-delivery of the consignment, the appellant/firm took up the matter with DHL Express (I) Mumbai, who informed the appellant/firm that the shipment was seized by the Customs Department at IGI Airport, New Delhi on 02.12.2013 and that 20 (twenty) shawls out of 33 have been sent for forensic examination. 7. Based on this information, the appellant/firm sent its representative to New Delhi, in view of having a higher risk of moth/insect damage to the pure pashmina and also submitted an application to the respondent No. 5-Regional Deputy Director, Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (NR), New Delhi on 22.05.2014, requesting him to release the consignment without any further delay, however, the respondent No. 2 vide Communication dated 10.06.2014, informed the appellant that the examination report and 20 (twenty) sealed shawls relating to SB No. 8685517, as received from forensic cell of Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, was submitted to the office of Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Export), IGI, Air Cargo, Complex, New Delhi on 11.06.2014, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15 with a direction to appear before him on 22.06.2015. 12. Aggrieved of the aforesaid actions by the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 being violative of interim order passed by this Court in OWP No. 251/2015 and the same being without jurisdiction, the appellant challenged the same through the medium of Writ Petition bearing OWP No. 1110/2015 before this Court and sought the following reliefs:- "(i) By issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, the impugned Communication No. 1-270/WCCB/NR/14/153 dated 13.04.2015 addressed by respondent No.2 to respondent No.3, FIR No. RC220/2015/E-0007-CBI/EO-II/New Delhi under Sections 40, 49, 49-B and 58 read with Section 51 of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 registered by respondent No.3 against petitioner, as also the Notice bearing No. RC 220/2015/E0007-CBI/EO-II/IND dated 12.06.2015 issued by respondent No.4 to the petitioner alongwith the proceedings initiated against him be quashed; (ii) By issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents be directed not to proceed against petitioner on the basis of the impugned Communication dated 13.04.2015, FIR No. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt is contrary to law, as such, the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside. 15. By booking the consignment at Srinagar, the cause of action as contemplated under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India, has arisen to the appellant within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and all the Communications had also been addressed and received by the appellant at Srinagar; that the appellant while meeting the objection raised by the respondents with regard to maintainability of the writ petition, qua the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, had raised the principle of "Forum Conveniens" and under this principle, this Court had the jurisdiction to decide the case. 16. The main thrust/vehemence of the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner is that the Courts/Fora at Delhi may have jurisdiction in the matter, since the seizure and proposed confiscation and registration of a criminal case against the appellant-petitioner was at Delhi, however, this Court had also writ jurisdiction vested in it for the reason that the consignment/goods alleged to have seized, had been originated from Srinagar-the business place of the appellant-petitioner, through courier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been booked on 27.11.2013 from Srinagar through DHL Express (I) Private Limited, Mumbai, to be delivered in Switzerland within a period of one week, however, the appellant-petitioner though claiming to have received this consignment from its suppliers, did not specify as to who were the suppliers; what was their location and where the seized shawls had been manufactured. Therefore, merely receiving of shawls from its suppliers by the appellant-petitioner, without any descriptive details in its petitions, cannot be said that the part of the cause of action had accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. 19. It was for the appellant-petitioner, to at least plead and also urge at the time of arguments before the learned Writ Court or even before this Bench substantially, as to wherefrom it had received supplies of the consignment of shawls manufactured from the prohibited yarn, so that the learned Writ Court or this Court in appeal could have said that in view of commission of offences in J&K, the appellant's cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, so as to entertain the writ petitions for their disposal on merits. Merely pleading ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
