https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280267 A Magistrate could not order return of a truck under Section 523 of the Criminal Procedure Code once the truck and seized goods had been taken into customs custody and expressly seized by a proper officer under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. The prior police seizure did not keep the property within the Criminal Procedure Code regime because the customs authorities had already exercised their special statutory powers of search, seizure and confiscation. Authorities dealing with Criminal Procedure Code seizures or search-warrant custody were distinguished. The Magistrate therefore lacked jurisdiction over property validly seized under the Customs Act, and the order directing return of the truck was liable to be set aside. en-us Thu, 28 Aug 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Apr 2019 11:57:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280267 A Magistrate could not order return of a truck under Section 523 of the Criminal Procedure Code once the truck and seized goods had been taken into customs custody and expressly seized by a proper officer under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. The prior police seizure did not keep the property within the Criminal Procedure Code regime because the customs authorities had already exercised their special statutory powers of search, seizure and confiscation. Authorities dealing with Criminal Procedure Code seizures or search-warrant custody were distinguished. The Magistrate therefore lacked jurisdiction over property validly seized under the Customs Act, and the order directing return of the truck was liable to be set aside. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 Aug 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280267