TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (11) TMI 741
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ternational Airport as Inspectors of Central Excise etc. The Central Bureau of Investigation conducted raid on 20-7-1995 and seized certain foreign and Indian currency and certain other items from their counters. A panchanama was prepared about the recovery and the respondents were prosecuted before the Special Court for CBI Cases in C.C. No. 11 of 1999 for the offences under Section 120-B IPC read with Sections 13(2) and 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. In the above calendar case, in support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs 1 to 8 and got marked Exs P-1 to P-34 and MOs 1 to 29. 3. All the respondents herein were convicted by the Special Judge vide its judgment dated: 25-1-2002 and they were sentenced to fine an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order". However, the above time of three months was extended by this court and ultimately now the enquiry is completed. On our instructions, the enquiry reports are placed before us for perusal. 6.  As seen from paragraph-2, of the judgment of the Special Judge for CBI Cases, in C.C. No. 11 of 1999, the substance of the allegations leveled against the accused (the present respondents) is that all of them entered into conspiracy on 20-7-1995, collected amounts in different denominations - Rs. 22,700-00 Indian Currency; 2735 UAE Dinarams; 25 Oman Riyals; 262 US Dollars; 660 Saudi Riyals; 100 Oman Riyal Biyasa; 200 Oman Biyasa from the passengers coming from Foreign countries. They also collected some foreign articles prohibited under L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Indian Rs. 10 x 100 = Rs. 1000-00 One 100 ml bottle of 2. Indian Rs. 500 x 4 = Rs. 2,000-00 Astral Natural Spray 3. US Dollars 50 x 1 = 100 One 75ml bottle of 4. Saudi Riyals 100 x 1 = 100 Jamilets 5. UAE Dirham 50 x 1 = 50 6. Saudi Riyals 10 x 2 = 20 7. UAE Dirham 10 x 3 = 30 8. Saudi Riyals 50 x 1 = 50 3. Sri M.B.G. Tilak (W.P. No. 744 of 2009) S. No. Currency seized Items seized 1. Indian Rs. 10 x 100 = Rs. 1000-00 One 150 ml Pour Le Corps Perfume bottle with markings of Abhudhabi of 177.0 One 250ml Nieva Crème No. 570 2. Indian Rs. 100 x 3 = Rs. 300-00 3. Saudi Riyals 100 x 2 = 200 4. Saudi Riyals 50 x 3 = 150 4. Sri T. Krishna Murthy. (W.P. No. 743 of 2009) S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Saudi Riyals 100 x 2 = 200 9. Sri M. Prem Kumar (W.P. No. 738 of 2009) S. No. Currency seized Items seized 1. Indian Rs. 10 x 100 = Rs. 1000-00 One 100 ml bottle of Astral Natural spray 2. Indian Rs. 500 x 4 = Rs. 2000-00 One 75 ml bottle of 3. US Dollars 50 x 1 = Rs. 50-00 Jamilets 4. Saudi Riyals 100 x 1 = 100-00 5. UAE Dirham 50 x 1 = 50 6. Saudi Riyals 10 x 2 = 20 7. UAE Dirham 10 x 3 = 30 8. Saidi Riyals 50 x 1 = 50 10. Sri P. Anjaneya Rao (W.P. No. 745 of 2009) S. No. Currency seized Items seized 1. Indian Rs. 500x 6 = 3000-00 One Lomani Paris Spray 2. Indian Rs. 100 x 3 = Rs. 300-00 3. UAE Dirhman 100 x 3 = 300 4. UAE Dirhman 100 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es. 10. Coming to the legal question, the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the question as to whether the accused, who were acquitted in criminal case can be proceeded against departmentally, are divergent. In State Bank of Hyderabad v. P. Kata Rao - 2008 (15) SCC 657 the Hon'ble Apex Court held that acquittal in a criminal case would not be a bar for initiation of departmental proceedings on the same set of facts. But the applicability of the above principle would depend on facts situation of each case. That was a case where a Bank officer facilitated his wife to get undue pecuniary benefit by permitting unauthorized adjustments which were done with his prior knowledge and he sanctioned and released loans to his close relati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... lapse of time in initiating departmental proceedings etc. 14. In this case, on facts, which we have already referred to the extent necessary, we feel that it is not a case where after acquittal of the accused in criminal case, departmental proceedings can be maintained. Further more, in this case, another important aspect is that the Report of the Enquiry Officer, which is circulated to the Bench, is in favour of the respondents-accused. 15. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners contends that in spite of the finding of the Enquiry Officer holding that the respondents are not guilty of the charges, the appropriate authority can take a different view and still punish the respondents. This position is undisputed. ....