Jurisdictional defect and financial hardship led to recall of stay and only partial waiver of penalty pre-deposit.

Jurisdictional competence determined the recall of the stay order because the confiscated gold biscuits exceeded the Single Member Bench limit, and the earlier hearing had not addressed that objection. On the pre-deposit question, financial hardship justified only partial relief: the applicants were treated as wage earners with no shown independent income, so complete waiver of penalty deposit was refused and the deposit requirement was reduced. The matter was then directed to proceed on compliance with the scaled-down pre-deposit.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the stay order was liable to be recalled on the ground that the matter, involving confiscation of gold biscuits valued above the Single Member Bench limit, ought to have been heard by a Division Bench; and (ii) whether the applicants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit of penalty on the ground of financial hardship.

Issue (i): whether the stay order was liable to be recalled on the ground that the matter, involving confiscation of gold biscuits valued above the Single Member Bench limit, ought to have been heard by a Division Bench.

Analysis: The value of the confiscated gold biscuits exceeded the jurisdictional limit for a Single Member Bench. Since the competence of the Single Member Bench had not been questioned at the earlier hearing, the jurisdictional objection was accepted and the stay order was recalled.

Conclusion: The stay order was recalled on the ground of jurisdiction.

Issue (ii): whether the applicants were entitled to waiver of pre-deposit of penalty on the ground of financial hardship.

Analysis: The applicants were found to be wage earners and no evidence of independent sources of income was shown. In those circumstances, complete waiver was not granted, but the pre-deposit requirement was scaled down having regard to their financial position.

Conclusion: Partial dispensation of pre-deposit was allowed, and the applicants were directed to deposit reduced amounts of penalty.

Final Conclusion: The order granted limited relief by recalling the earlier stay order on jurisdictional grounds while relieving the applicants only to the extent of a reduced pre-deposit, with the appeal to proceed to regular hearing after compliance.

---