9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Challenge to order denying return of seized gold bars u/s Customs Act, interpretation of Rule 170 of Calcutta High Court Criminal Rules, 1985, exercise of inherent powers contrary to court rules.
In the judgment, the petitioner challenged an order by the Metropolitan Magistrate denying the return of seized gold bars. The petitioner argued that the Collector of Customs, u/s Customs Act, allowed return of the gold bars upon payment of redemption fine, which had already been paid. The court noted that the seized gold bars had been exhibited as material evidence in the case. Rule 170 of the Calcutta High Court Criminal Rules, 1985 states that no article admitted in evidence shall be returned or destroyed until the appeal is disposed of or after six months if no appeal is filed. The court acknowledged the rule's force of law and hesitated to go against it. However, considering that the redemption fine had been paid, the court directed the Magistrate to expedite the criminal proceeding without unnecessary adjournments. The seized gold bars were to be disposed of in accordance with the law after the conclusion of the proceeding, taking into account that the petitioner had already paid the redemption fine, preventing forfeiture to the State. The revisional application and related matters were disposed of with these directions, and the Criminal Section was instructed to provide certified copies of the order promptly to the parties involved.
|
