Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 1986 (12) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1986 (12) TMI 42 - HC - Customs

Issues:
Jurisdiction of the Magistrate to order the return of seized truck before filing a formal complaint under the Customs Act.
Authority of the High Court to direct the return of the truck under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code or Article 227 of the Constitution.

Jurisdiction Issue:
The judgment involves two criminal revisions arising from orders passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate related to the return of a seized truck by the customs department. The customs department objected to the return, arguing that the Magistrate lacked jurisdiction as no complaint had been filed by customs or cognizance taken. The Magistrate initially ordered the return on bond, but later stayed the order for the customs department to seek superior court orders. The High Court analyzed previous decisions and concluded that the Magistrate did not have jurisdiction to order the return before the launch of criminal proceedings under the Customs Act. The Court highlighted that Customs Officers do not function as police officers and must report seizures to the Collector of Customs, not the Magistrate. Therefore, the Magistrate's assumption of jurisdiction was deemed unjustified.

High Court's Authority Issue:
The High Court addressed the argument that even if the Magistrate lacked power to order the return, the Court could direct the return under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code or Article 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner, as the registered owner of the truck, claimed it was her only source of livelihood and sought its return. The Court acknowledged the customs department's right to start confiscation proceedings but noted the owner's right to claim a fine instead of confiscation under the Customs Act. Considering the truck's importance for the owner's livelihood, the High Court directed the release of the seized truck upon the owner furnishing a bond and a bank guarantee to the satisfaction of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The revision petitions were disposed of accordingly, with the order to be sent to the Magistrate promptly.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates