Departmental exoneration on core allegations can remove the basis for criminal prosecution and justify quashing of proceedings.

Departmental adjudication and criminal prosecution are distinct, and one does not automatically bar the other. However, where the departmental appellate authority returns a finding in favour of the accused on the same core allegations that found the criminal case, the evidentiary basis of the prosecution is removed. In that situation, continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose and may amount to an abuse of process. On the stated facts, the finding that there was no evidence connecting the petitioner with the recovered gold or currency supported quashing of the criminal case.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal proceedings for alleged smuggling and related offences could be quashed after the departmental appellate authority had returned a finding that there was no evidence connecting the petitioner with the recovered gold or currency.

Analysis: Departmental adjudication and criminal prosecution are distinct, and the pendency of one does not by itself bar the other. However, where the departmental proceedings culminate in a finding in favour of the accused on the very allegations that form the foundation of the criminal case, the basis of the prosecution is removed. In such a situation, continuation of the criminal case would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of the process of law. The finding of the appellate customs authority in the petitioner's favour was on the same core allegations and negated the evidentiary basis for the prosecution.

Conclusion: The criminal proceedings against the petitioner could not be sustained and were liable to be quashed.

---