https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273593 Departmental adjudication is not equivalent to a criminal prosecution or acquittal, so prior exoneration in customs proceedings did not trigger double jeopardy or issue estoppel. The High Court held that Article 20(2) of the Constitution and Section 300 CrPC apply only after a prior prosecution and conviction, acquittal, or equivalent determination by a competent criminal court. Since the trial court had complaint and witness material sufficient to assess a prima facie case at the charge stage, the revisional challenge to framing of charge under Section 135(1) of the Customs Act was rejected and the revision dismissed. en-us Wed, 11 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jul 2018 11:08:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273593 Departmental adjudication is not equivalent to a criminal prosecution or acquittal, so prior exoneration in customs proceedings did not trigger double jeopardy or issue estoppel. The High Court held that Article 20(2) of the Constitution and Section 300 CrPC apply only after a prior prosecution and conviction, acquittal, or equivalent determination by a competent criminal court. Since the trial court had complaint and witness material sufficient to assess a prima facie case at the charge stage, the revisional challenge to framing of charge under Section 135(1) of the Customs Act was rejected and the revision dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 11 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273593