Customs prosecution quashed where Tribunal exonerated accused on identical facts and continuation was treated as abuse of process.

Criminal prosecution under Section 135 of the Customs Act was quashed under Section 482 CrPC because the Tribunal, as the final fact-finding authority, had already set aside the customs adjudication and exonerated the accused on the same facts. The Tribunal's unchallenged findings held that the duty demand, confiscation, penalties, and alleged diversion were not sustainable. The Court applied the settled principle that continuation of criminal proceedings on identical allegations, after a competent authority has given a clean finding for the accused, amounts to abuse of process. The complaint proceedings were therefore terminated.

---

---

Issues: Whether criminal proceedings under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 could be quashed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when the Tribunal, acting as the final fact-finding authority, had set aside the customs adjudication order and exonerated the accused on the same facts.

Analysis: The petitioners had been proceeded against on the basis of the same factual allegations that had already been examined by the Tribunal. The Tribunal's order remained unchallenged and recorded findings that the duty demand, confiscation, and penalties were not sustainable, including the absence of proof for the alleged diversion and related contraventions. The Court applied the settled principle that criminal prosecution should not be continued where the competent fact-finding authority has given a clean finding in favour of the accused on the very same allegations, and where continuation of proceedings would amount to abuse of process.

Conclusion: The criminal prosecution was held not to be maintainable and was quashed in favour of the petitioners.

Final Conclusion: Continuation of the complaint proceedings was treated as unwarranted in view of the Tribunal's subsisting exoneration on identical facts, and the inherent jurisdiction of the Court was exercised to terminate the prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the final fact-finding authority under the governing fiscal statute has conclusively exonerated the accused on the same set of facts and the order is unchallenged, continuation of criminal prosecution on those very allegations amounts to abuse of process and may be quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction.

---