9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (8) TMI 354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndent No. 1 from the various trousers found in the said suit case. 3. On 26th April, 2006, respondent No. 1 moved an application for release of the goods and after hearing, the ACMM passed an order on 29th September, 2006 that goods recovered from the personal search, which are not liable to confiscation be released to the accused. 4. Therefore, on 9th October, 2006, the petitioner moved an application for recalling of the order dated 29th September, 2006 of release of wearing apparels and articles of personal search and daily use of the respondent. After hearing, the ACMM dismissed the said application of 13th October, 2006. 5. It has been contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the alleged wearing apparels were neither the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rajesh Bhaskar, Crl. Rev. No. 259/1999. 7. Trial Court record has been perused. 8. On 18th April, 2006, an application was moved on behalf of Sachin Bharti (respondent No.2) before the Trial Court for release of the goods seized by the Collector of Customs, except the goods liable for confiscation of such terms and conditions. 9. On this application, the ACMM passed the following order on 26th April, 2006 :- "File taken up on the application of the accused. Present : Ms. Mala Sharma SPP. Shri Ajay Gupta counsel for the applicant/accused Sachin Bharti. It is submitted that the personal belongings of the accused which are liable for confiscation has also been withheld by the department and by way of this application the accused is seek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re and to ensure that the entire set of the complaint along with annexures are supplied to the accused persons. Matter is passed over for supply of the documents. Sd/- ACMM/29-9-2006 12.15 p.m. Present: Ms. Pooja Bhaskar, proxy for the SPP. Accused no. 1 in person on bail. Accused no. 2 on bail with counsel Shri Ajay Gupta. Copies of the complainant along with the complete annexures have been supplied to the accused no. 2. Ld. Counsel for the accused seeks time to file a reply to the application filed by the SPP for recall/modification of the earlier order. It is submitted that the Laptop is a vital and crucial piece of evidence which is required to be produced before this Court during the trial, hence the same cannot be released. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es of personal and daily use, which were not the case property, were ordered to be released. 15. If the Custom Department had any grievance against the orders dated 29th September, 2006 and 13th October, 2006, then the appropriate remedy was to file appeal/revision. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. does not lie, since there is no abuse of process of any Court and on this point certain decisions of this Court are referred; Makhdum Ali v. Nargis Bano and Anr., 23 (1983) Delhi Law Times 100, in which it was held that :- "Where specific remedy is open to party to set aside ex parte order under Section 126 Cr.P.C. and the remedy was not availed, the High Court will not interfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C." 16. In other case decid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
