2020 (1) TMI 600 - HC - Customs

Appellate court upholds acquittal in export obligations case emphasizing double presumption post-acquittal

Union of India through, Deputy Chief Controller of Imports & Exports, Versus Hukmichand Jain, M/s Diarough International, State of Maharashtra

Union of India through, Deputy Chief Controller of Imports & Exports, Versus Hukmichand Jain, M/s Diarough International, State of Maharashtra - 2020 ... Issues:1. Impugned order of acquittal under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) 1947.2. Allegation of non-fulfillment of export obligations and forged export orders.3. Evidence presented by the prosecution regarding export obligations.4. Legal principles governing appellate court's powers in appeals against acquittals.Analysis:1. The case involved an appeal by the Union of India against an order of acquittal under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) 1947. The appellant alleged that the accused had not fulfilled their export obligations as per the license issued, leading to the charge of contravening conditions of the license and committing an offense under the said Act.2. The appellant contended that the accused had obtained the license by submitting forged and fabricated export orders. However, the charge framed did not include forgery allegations, focusing solely on the non-fulfillment of export obligations. The accused denied the charges and claimed to have fulfilled the obligations within the extended period granted by the competent authority.3. The prosecution presented evidence through witnesses to support the charge of non-fulfillment of export obligations. The witnesses confirmed that the export obligations were not met within the initial time frame but acknowledged that the accused complied before the extended deadline. The investigating officer verified the export statements and confirmed the fulfillment of obligations within the extended period.4. In analyzing the trial court's acquittal, the appellate court referred to legal principles governing appeals against acquittals. Citing the Supreme Court's judgment in Chandrappa & Ors. v. State of Karnataka, the court highlighted the double presumption in favor of the accused post-acquittal. The appellate court emphasized that unless the trial court's decision is illegal or improper, an order of acquittal should not be interfered with.5. Ultimately, the appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, noting that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court found no grounds to deem the trial court's opinion as illegal or contrary to law, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.