TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (6) TMI 223
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....me and address of the importer was revealed as Kanchan Marketing, Ahmedabad. The Bill of Entry showed that two packages were weighed 193.4 kgs and description of goods was given as fuses (sample of NCV). The Bill of Entry had I.E. Code No. 0895003384 which refers to Kanchan Marketing, Ahmedabad. The declared value was shown as Rs. 2,366/- which was assessed to Rs. 5,000/- by the petitioner-accused No. 2, who was then posted as an Appraising Officer at A.A.I. Warehouse of Air Cargo Complex, Sahar. The duty of Rs. 2,965/- was paid in cash. The examination report was also written by the present petitioner. 4. The department not being satisfied with the declaration, the packages were examined and dutiable goods like 700 Skin Cameras and 18 Cordless Telephones valued at Rs. 2,64,000/- were recovered and seized under panchanama.. 5. The statement of the said Siddharth Tambe was recorded u/s. 108 of the Customs Act. He admitted his guilt of clearing the consignment as per the orders of one Anil Mehta and for which he received monetary consideration of Rs. 1,500/-. 6. It is not necessary to refer to the prosecution allegations with regard to the other accused. 7. The case of the prosec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Customs in connivance with Shri Bhagwan, Shri Tambe, Shri Anil Mehta, Shri Nilesh Aiya and Shri M.K. Sarangi, Appraiser of A.C.C." 42. Investigations further revealed that the Appraiser Shri M.K. Sarangi used to accept the misdeclarations made in the Bs/E Anil Mehta gave through Nilesh Aiya and assessed the same according]y without reference to actual goods imported and covered by Bs/E. For this work he used to receive monetary consideration from Anil Mehta through the hands of Nilesh Aiya he also assessed those Bs/E goods covered by which were lying in the light shed import warehouse of ACC, Sahar while he was posted at AAI warehouse of ACC, Sahar, Mr. Sarangi thus assessed six Bs/E which were misdeclared by Anil Mehta as per the say of Bipin Ballani and with the assistance of Nilesh Aiya. Two of these successfully cleared were delivered from AAI Warehouse (consignments cleared by B/E No. 1671/20-9-97 and 1670/20-9-97) and the remaining two cleared successfully were delivered from the Light Import shed of A.C.C. Sahar (consignments cleared vide B/E No. 08208/13-11-97 and 03352/6-11-97) prior to the two consignments seized by SACPU on 17-11-99 (B/E No. 08269/13-11-97) and 19-11-9....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....- on the petitioner by invoking Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. The Commissioner during the adjudication proceedings relied upon the same report, of the handwriting expert and other materials, which have been reproduced by him as part of the investigations and documents in the private complaint. 16. The Tribunal after hearing the petitioner's Advocate so also the departmental representative has observed in paragraph 10 of its order as under :- "10. The issue involved is one of appreciation of evidence. The Commissioner seems to be complimenting the opinion of handwriting expert when he says that he himself finds lot of similarities between Shri M.K. Sarangi's handwriting and the one found on the impugned Bs/E. The decision cited by the ld. advocate Shri J.C. Patel is relevant and goes to the root of the problem. The handwriting expert has not given any reasons as to why he comes to a particular finding and the Commissioner does not either. What remain are the statements of Anil Mehta who has been only told by the clerk of CHA that he is getting the goods cleared through Shri Sarangi and that he is paying money for getting the job done. Shri Anil Mehta himself has not approache....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion, then, it is unlikely that the prosecution would be able to bring home the charge in the criminal case. The petitioner, in such circumstances being forced to go through the trial in the criminal case is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court and for securing the ends of justice otherwise this is a fit case where this Court should quash the proceedings in the Criminal Case No. 9/CW/2001 pending on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's 3rd Court, Esplanade, Mumbai. Shri Mundargi in support of his submissions relied upon the decisions of this Court reported in 1997 (VI) LJ 711 (Ramniklal Premchand Mehta & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors.) and 1998 (VI) LJ 394 (Ramniklal Premchand Mehta v. Union of India and Others). Re1iance is also placed upon the decisions of other High Courts. Reliance is also placed on a judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.L. Didwania v. Income Tax Officer reported in 1999 (108) E.L.T. 16 (S.C.). Finally Mr. Mundargi also relied upon a decision delivered by me in the case of Raichand C. Jain v. Surendra Prasad reported in 2006 (3) AIR Bom. R 411. 19. On the other hand, Mrs. Kejariwal, appearing for the responde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s specifically alleged as far as the petitioner is concerned that he cleared the consignments having valuable electronic items and other items of different parties under different bills of entries at very low rate of custom duty knowing fully well the real value of the goods and the conspiracy to cause revenue loss, after accepting illegal gratification. 24. However, a final report under Section 169 r/w Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed in the Special Court and it was clearly stated that the investigation revealed that electronic goods in question were imported by Kanchan Marketing and Star Exporters of Ahmedabad. There is no sufficient evidence according to the prosecution to show that the bills of entries were marked to the petitioner but reliance was placed on the opinion of the handwriting expert. However, on the own showing of the prosecution, credibility of the other documents including the panchanama is questionable on account of the lapses on the part of the investigating machinery. Thus, the prosecution intended to close the case alleging serious charges of cheating, Bribery and corruption so also criminal conspiracy on the ground that the material w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ways be invoked and applied. 27. I had an occasion to consider similar controversy in the case of Raichand C. Jain v. Surendra Prasad reported in 2006 (3) AIR Bom R 411 wherein, in paragraphs 20 and 24, I had observed thus : "20. However, as has been stated above, it is not as if both proceedings cannot go on. The nature of the proceedings has also been noted and the difference spelt out in the Supreme Court decision referred to above. It is equally true that at the stage where the criminal proceedings are today, namely, framing of charge, it cannot be said that their continuance further is impermissible in law. However, it is also well settled that if the continuation of the criminal proceedings after final conclusion of adjudication proceedings is an abuse of process of the Court, then certainly powers u/s. 482 of Cr.P.C. can be exercised. Precisely this has been done in the case of U.N. Mehta by a learned Single Judge of this Court. There the charges were under the FERA. In that case, adjudication proceedings were in favour of the applicant before this Court. The Department did not carry the matter further and allowed the order of the Special Director to gain finality. In thes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o legislative enactment dealing with procedure can provide for all cases that may possible arise. Courts, therefore, have inherent powers apart from express provisions of law which are necessary for proper discharge of functions and duties imposed upon them by law. That is the doctrine which finds expression in the section which merely recognizes and preserves inherent powers of the High Courts. All Courts, whether civil or criminal possess, in the absence of any express provision, as inherent in their constitution, all such powers as are necessary to do the right and to undo a wrong in course of administration of justice on the principle "quando lex aliquid alicui concedit, concedere videtur et id sine quo res ipsae esse non potest" when the law gives a person anything it gives him that without which it cannot exist. While exercising powers under the Section, the Court does not function as a Court of appeal or revision. Inherent jurisdiction under the section though wide has to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with caution and only when such exercise is justified by the tests specifically laid down in the Section itself. It is to be exercised ex debito justitiae to do real an....