Clandestine removal allegations fail where the appellate forum negates the foundation of the excise complaint and summoning order.

A criminal complaint under Central Excise law based on allegations of clandestine removal and suppression of production was quashed because the appellate tribunal, on the same material, had already held that the department was not justified in finding clandestine removal. Once the foundational allegations were negated by the competent appellate forum, the summoning order lost its basis and continuation of the prosecution was unwarranted, as it would serve no useful purpose and could only result in acquittal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint and summoning order under the Central Excise law were liable to be quashed after the appellate tribunal had held that there was no justified finding of clandestine removal.

Analysis: The complaint was founded on allegations of clandestine clearance and suppression of production. The appellate tribunal, on the same core material, had already concluded that the department was not justified in holding that the goods had been clandestinely removed. Once the basis of the complaint and the summoning order was undermined, continuation of the prosecution would serve no purpose and could only lead to acquittal.

Conclusion: The complaint and the summoning order were quashed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the foundational allegations supporting a criminal complaint under the excise law are negatived by the competent appellate forum, continuation of the prosecution is unwarranted and the complaint is liable to be quashed.

---