2023 (5) TMI 401

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on petition under Section 130D of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 377 (1) of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) praying for enhancement of sentence awarded vide the impugned judgment and order dated 02.11.2020 passed by the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandel in Cril. (C) Case No. 10 of 2019. By the Impugned judgement and order, the Ld. CJM, Chandel convicted the respondents, accepting plea of guilty, under Section 135 (1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 and considered the submission of the Ld. SPP (Special Public Prosecutor) for the Custom to take a lenient view and given the nature of the case, sentenced the respondents (convicts) to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- each and on default o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ut considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and will serve a bad precedent. While hearing for the admission of the revision petition, vide order dated 18.10.2022, this Court observed that it would not be open to the custom authority to seek enhancement of the sentence when the same was passed as per the suggestion of the Ld. SPP to take a lenient view. Mr. Th. Sanachouba, learned counsel for the Customs, sought some time to get instruction as to whether Ld. SPP was instructed to make such a suggestion to the Ld. CJM and if not, whether any action was initiated against him. The order dated 18.10.2022 passed by this Court is reproduced herein below: "Heard Mr. Th. Sanachouba, learned counsel for the petitioner. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....toms, relies upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Alamgir vs. State of Bihar reported as AIR 1959 SC 436 to impress upon the point that the High Court can exercise revisional power to interfere with the sentence. During the course of hearing, this Court has pointed out to Mr. Th. Sanachouba, learned counsel for the petitioner, as to whether how a revision petition has been filed against the order for enhancement of the sentence. However, Mr. Th. Sanachouba, learned counsel, clarifies by referring to the above noted judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various other judgments mentioned in the additional affidavit that a revision petition is maintainable to examine the sentence and prays this Court that th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er dated 02.11.2020, the leniency was taken by the Ld. CJM, Chandel on the specific submission of the Ld. SPP for the custom. As such, the petitioner has no right to agitate the same before this Court. In the order dated 18.10.2022, this Court specially directed the petitioner to file an affidavit as to whether the Ld. SPP of custom was instructed to make a suggestion to the Ld. CJM for taking a lenient view in sentencing and if not, any action was taken. After seeking 7 (seven) adjournments, an additional affidavit dated 11.04.2023 was filed explaining about the maintainability of the revision petition against the inadequacy of sentence. However, nothing is stated about the specific query of this Court as to whether any instruction was giv....