2018 (10) TMI 1811 - HC - Customs

Discharge of the officer of the Customs Department - the officers were asked to face trial for the offence under Sections 132, 135, 135A and 136 of the Customs Act, 1962 - discharge on the ground that without issuance of notice under Section 155(2) of Customs Act after limitation period no proceedings can be initiated - HELD THAT - This Court had gone through the complaint lodged by the State. The complaint runs to around 80 pages, which had descriptively narrated the role of each of these accused persons as Officers of the Customs in facilitating the export of prohibited red sanders by clearing the Customs bills containing false information - In these facts scenario, it is to be tested whether the protection given to the Government Servant of Central or State or local authority for anything done or purporting to be done in pursuance of this Act, is available to the respondents who are A-1 to A-3. Section 155 reads that no suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against the Government servants of either Government or local authority for anything which is done, or intended to be done in good faith, in pursuance of this Act or the Rules or regulations - Whereas the specific allegation against the respondents is that they have done certain act which is contrary to the Customs Act and the Rules framed there under. It is also specifically alleged against them that the act done by these accused persons are not done with dishonest intention. Thus the scope of differing good faith gets excluded. In the said circumstances, the protection given under the Act which is available to Servants of either Government/local authority who have done any act in good faith and in pursuance to the provision of Customs, Act is not applicable to the respondents - Revision allowed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Discharge of accused Customs Officers for violation of Customs Act.
2. Interpretation of Section 155 of the Customs Act regarding initiation of legal proceedings against Government servants.
3. Application of legal precedents in determining the scope of protection under Section 155.

Analysis:
1. The High Court addressed the issue of the discharge of accused Customs Officers who were facing trial for serious violations of the Customs Act. The accused officers were alleged to have colluded with private individuals to export prohibited goods fraudulently, leading to a complaint by the State. The Court noted the detailed allegations against the accused officers, highlighting their role in facilitating the smuggling of red sanders logs and enabling exporters to claim duty drawback through misdeclaration and fraud.

2. The key legal issue revolved around the interpretation of Section 155 of the Customs Act, which provides protection to Government servants for acts done in good faith in pursuance of the Act. The Court analyzed the applicability of this provision to the accused officers, emphasizing that the protection under the Act is not absolute and does not cover acts contrary to the Customs Act. The Court differentiated between good faith actions and acts done with dishonest intention, concluding that the protection did not extend to the accused officers in this case.

3. In determining the scope of legal proceedings against Government servants under Section 155, the Court referred to relevant legal precedents and judgments. It highlighted the distinction between sub-sections (1) and (2) of Section 155, emphasizing that the protection from prosecution is specifically mentioned in sub-section (1) but not in sub-section (2). The Court cited a judgment from the Rajasthan High Court to support its interpretation that criminal prosecution is not included in the term "proceedings" under the Act.

4. Ultimately, the High Court allowed the Criminal Revision Cases, setting aside the order discharging the accused officers. The Court directed the Trial Court to complete the trial within a specified timeframe, emphasizing the importance of proper consideration of the law in such cases. The judgment underscored the need to ensure accountability and adherence to legal procedures in prosecuting individuals, especially Government servants, for violations of statutory provisions like the Customs Act.