TMI Blog1986 (7) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as alleged in the complaint may be stated as follows :- The first respondent complainant is the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Pune. Original accused No. 1 is M/s. Kirloskar Brothers Limited, while accused No. 2 is the Chairman and accused Nos. 3 to 18 are the Directors of the said Company. According to the allegations in the complaint, accused Nos. 3 to 18, who include the petitioner, accused No. 17 are Directors of accused No. 1 and were in charge and responsible to accused No. l for the conduct of business at the time of the commission of the offence. Accused Nos. 19 to 30 are senior executive officers of the said Company and were in charge of and responsible to accused No. 1 for the conduct of business at the material time. Accused No. 31 is M/s. Kirloskar Proprietory Ltd. Accused Nos. 32 to 36 were the Directors of the said Company while accused No. 37 was the Secy. of accused No. 31 Company. 4.The case of the prosecution is that accused No. 1 Company deals in manufacture of hermetically sealed compressors of various categories. At all material times the day to day work of the factory was managed by the board of directors (accused Nos. 2 to 18 ) under the supervi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he conference, has also been seized. 9.In para 22 of the complaint another activity of accused Nos. 1 to 30 has been alleged for the purpose of evasion of excise duty. According to the complainant the Trade Mark of the Company was assigned to accused No. 31 Company and the right of user of the trade mark was allotted to accused No. 1 Company. Accused No. 1 Company in turn decided to reduce the prices of the compressors relating to warranty charges and allowed accused No. 31 Company to issue warranty against the goods manufactured by accused No. 1. It is further alleged that even though such sanction was accorded by the competent authority, the same was in bona fide belief that it was a regular transaction in course of business. However, the complainant found that the moneys recovered by accused No. 31 Company were siphoned back to the principal Company accused No. 1. 10.In short the case of the prosecution is that accused No. 1 Company evaded the excise duty fraudulently and dishonestly and accused Nos. 2 to 30 (Directors and Executive Officers of the said Company), who were responsible to day-to-day work of the said accused No. 1 Company conspired together and aided and abet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Procedure, and the said power is to be used sparingly and only where there is abuse of process of law or to meet the ends of justice. In the instant case as alleged in the complaint the trial Court was satisfied that there was a prima facie case for proceeding against the accused petitioner and the said order of issue of process is not liable to be quashed by either adding or substracting from the original allegations in the complaint. He also submitted that the petitioner can at any stage apply to the trial Court for his discharge from the proceeding on the facts alleged by him now. 14.Shri Sidhwa, advocate for the Union of India and Shri Chopda, Counsel for the State of Maharashtra supported the first respondent. 15.Since I have narrated in detail the allegations levelled in the complaint, the same need not be repeated over again. Suffice it to say that according to the prosecution during the period 1981 to 9 Dec.1985 accused No. 1 Company along with its directors and Executive Officers, accused Nos. 2 to 30 conspired together and did several acts with the unlawful object of evasion of excise duty. The charge of conspiracy signifies an agreement between accused persons t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the complaint before the Magistrate. Now that the fact has emerged that the petitioner was in no way connected with the alleged acts of conspiracy and that fact is not disputed, the question is whether this Court would be justified in exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution. 17.The complainant's Counsel relied on a case reported in the matter of Municipal Corporation of Delhi v Ram Kishan Rohatgi and others 1983 Cri. L.J.159 - A.I.R. 1983 S.C. 67, wherein Their Lordships have observed as follows :- "It is, therefore, manifestly clear that proceedings against an accused in the a initial stages can be quashed only if on the face of the complaint or the papers accompanying the same, no offence is committed. In other words, the test is that taking the allegations and the complaint as they are without adding or substracting anything, if no offence is made out, then the High Court will be justified in quashing the proceedings in exercise of its powers under Section 482 of the present Code." In the said case Their Lordships were concerned with a prosecution under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act wherein there is a deeming pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t an accused person must be tried under the provisions of the Code, and the High Court would be reluctant to interfere with the said proceedings at an interlocutory stage. It is not possible, desirable or expedient to lay down any inflexible rule which would govern the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction. However we may indicate some categories of cases where the inherent jurisdiction can and should be exercised for quashing the proceedings. There may be cases where it may be possible for the High Court to take the view that the institution or continuance of criminal proceedings against an accused person may amount to the abuse of the process of the court or that the quashing of the impugned proceedings would secure the ends of justice. If the criminal proceeding in question is in respect of an offence alleged to have been committed by an accused person and it manifestly appears that there is a legal bar against the institution or continuance of the said proceeding, the High Court would be justified in quashing the proceeding in that ground. Absence of the requisite sanction may for instance furnish cases under this category. Cases may also arise where the allegations in the Firs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts may be of grave consequence to the very maintainability of the complaint or the allegations against a particular accused. I am sure that in such a situation also if the Court finds that suppression of material fact would result in abuse of process of Court and needless harassment to a particular accused of facing a trial unnecessarily or where such a trial would be an exercise in futility against a particular accused, this Court can exercise its inherent power to meet the ends of justice at an appropriate time. It may be urged as has been urged on behalf of the complinant, that the accused can approach the trial Court and apply for discharge. In any case in an admitted position as is before me the petitioner who is not shown to have and could not have participated in any of the acts of conspiracy need not be advised to go back to the trial Court and take a chance which may end in discharge or may entail further protraction to High Court or Supreme Court. It would be unjust to ask the petitioner to go back to the trial Court for further steps, particularly when the fact of his joining the company on 19-11-1985 is not at all disputed. 21.In another case relied upon by the peti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in the very nature of things not be regarded as exhaustive. Considerations justifying the exercise of inherent powers for securing the ends of justice naturally very from case to case and a jurisdiction as wholesome as the one conferred by Section 482 ought not to be encased within the strait-jacket of a rigid formula." 23.To my mind the present case is such where I would be justified in invoking the interest powers of this Court. I am satisfied from the undisputed averment that the petitioner joined the Company as a Director only on 19th November, 1985, a few days before the raid was effected, and had not participated in any of the earlier proceedings leading to the conspiracy of evasion of excise duty during the period 1981 to 1984. It would be an exercise in futility to allow the prosecution to continue against petitioner accused No. 17. It would also amount to an abuse of process of Court and gross injustice to the petitioner. It would also not be worthwhile to call upon the petitioner to approach the trial Court for taking steps for his discharge in the face of this admitted position. In order to meet the ends of justice, therefore I allow this petition and quash the proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
