2015 (4) TMI 346

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., a wooden box was intercepted on suspicion and was examined by the Customs Preventive Officers of IGI Airport. The wooden box had contained Stone Figure Handicrafts in the courier manifest. In the airway bill, sender was shown as Mr.Robert Jaeger and receiver was shown as M/s DHL Worldwide Express. On examination of wooden box, it was found containing one partly mutilated stone head. The officers of Archaeological Survey of India were called to examine the said stone head. The officers of Archaeological Survey of India identified the sand stone head as of Budha and declared the same to be an Antiquity. The same was, therefore, seized. The allegation against the respondent was that the sand stone head of Budha was booked by him for Robert J....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rder dated 16.11.2005. 6. Argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the order of discharge passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate is based on the judgment of Dr. V.J.A. Flynn (supra) and the present case is different from the case of Dr. V.J.A. Flynn (supra). He has further contended that in the present case there is clear violation of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment in the case of Dr. V.J.A. Flynn (supra) is not applicable in the present case as the same has already been challenged in the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide SLP No.1525/1996 and the same is pending for decision. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to judgment in the case of Om Prakash Bhati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ead as under : "19. After the amendment in the Antiquities Act it is apparent that the Legislature with full conscience departed from the previous provisions of Section 4 of 1947 Act thereby making it sure that all the provisions of Customs Act are not made applicable to the Antiquities Act. Only the provisions whenever confiscation has to be applied then Customs Act provisions would be invoked. Therefore, no reliance on the provisions of Section 127 or for that matter Chapter-XVI of the Customs Act can be taken help of. Section 127 of the Customs Act seemingly stipulates adjudication before confiscation and thereafter prosecution under Chapter XVI but not before that. Hence, reading of Section 127 of the Customs Act and Section 4 of the A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on the basis of that complaint are ordered to be dropped." 10. In view of the law laid down by this Court in Dr.V.J.N. Flynn's case (supra), it is a settled law that Section 4 of the Antiquities Act, 1947 made all the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 applicable to an offence committed under Section 3 of the 1947 Act. An amendment was brought into force vide Section 4 of the Act of 1972 vide which the Legislature omitted the applicability of all the provisions of the Customs Act. Provisions of the Customs Act are now applicable only for confiscation and not for prosecution. Section 25 of the Antiquities Act stipulates that if any person contravenes the provision of Section 3, he shall be liable for punishment without prejudice to the ac....