Excise allegation and cheating complaint could not survive after findings of no suppression, fraud, or undervaluation became final.

A criminal complaint alleging excise-duty evasion and cheating could not continue after the underlying excise findings had already been negatived. The High Court had earlier held that the goods were not shown to be cosmetic, there was no suppression, fraud, or undervaluation, and the show-cause action was time-barred; that determination became final after the departmental challenge failed in the Supreme Court. Once the factual and legal basis for the excise allegation collapsed, the complaint had no sustainable foundation. A possible future review petition did not affect the finality of the existing judgment, and discharge was not required as a mere formality where the proceedings lacked legal justification.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal complaint under the excise law and Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 could continue after the High Court had found no suppression of facts, no fraud, no undervaluation, and had set aside the excise demand.

Analysis: The complaint rested on the premise that the applicants had evaded excise duty by misclassifying their products. That foundation had already been negatived in the writ proceedings, where the High Court held that the goods were not shown to be cosmetic, that there was no suppression or fraud, and that the show-cause action was barred by limitation. The dismissal of the departmental challenge in the Supreme Court made that determination final for the purposes of the proceedings before the Magistrate. Once the basic findings supporting the excise allegation had collapsed, the criminal complaint could not survive. The possibility of a future review petition did not affect the finality of the existing judgment, and where the proceedings were found to be without legal justification, the applicants were not required to pursue discharge as a formality.

Conclusion: The criminal complaint was held to be not maintainable and the pending proceedings were liable to be terminated in favour of the applicants.

---