Final adjudication findings can bar a criminal complaint when no departmental challenge is made and facts are identical.

A criminal complaint based on the same factual foundation as prior customs adjudication and FERA proceedings was found unsustainable where the petitioner had been exonerated in those proceedings and the Department had not challenged the exonerating orders. The Court noted that exoneration in adjudication does not automatically bar prosecution, but where the departmental findings have attained finality and no contrary challenge has been made, a criminal prosecution on the same facts cannot be sustained. The complaint was therefore liable to be quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint could be quashed when the petitioner had been exonerated in adjudication proceedings under the Customs Act and the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, and the exonerating orders had not been challenged by the Department.

Analysis: The petitioner had been proceeded against on the same factual foundation in customs adjudication, FERA proceedings, and the criminal complaint. The adjudicating authorities had recorded findings favourable to the petitioner and the FERA order expressly held that the relevant conduct did not amount to transfer of foreign exchange within the meaning of the provision invoked. Those orders were not appealed and had attained finality. In such circumstances, the Court held that while there is no absolute rule that exoneration in adjudication automatically bars prosecution, a criminal prosecution based on the same facts cannot be sustained where the departmental findings have been accepted as final and no contrary challenge has been mounted by the Department.

Conclusion: The complaint was liable to be quashed and the petitioner succeeded.

---