1964 (2) TMI 2 - SC - Customs

As the foreign companies whose vessels have contravened Section 52A and in respect of which penalties have been imposed under Section 167(12A) read with Section 183, are not entitled to claim the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution and so, that plea fails.

Summary

Issues:
1. Construction of Section 52A of the Sea Customs Act.
2. Jurisdiction of High Court under Article 226 for immediate challenges against orders by the Collector of Customs.
3. Validity of Section 52A of the Sea Customs Act in relation to fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The judgment addresses multiple civil appeals and writ petitions concerning the interpretation of Section 52A of the Sea Customs Act. Various appellants challenged fines and confiscation orders imposed by the Collector of Customs. The Court consolidated these cases for a common judgment due to the shared question of law regarding the construction of Section 52A.

2. The Court examined the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 for immediate challenges against orders by the Collector of Customs. It was observed that while the High Court's writ jurisdiction could be invoked, parties are generally required to exhaust alternative remedies provided by the law before approaching the Court directly. The judgment emphasized the importance of following the prescribed appellate and revisional procedures under the Sea Customs Act.

3. The validity of Section 52A of the Sea Customs Act in relation to fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(f) of the Constitution was also a key issue. The Court clarified that foreign companies and entities like the Shipping Corporation of India Ltd. cannot claim fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(f) or challenge the validity of Section 52A on those grounds. Citing precedents, the Court held that such entities are not entitled to the protections afforded to citizens under Article 19(1).

In conclusion, the Court dismissed all civil appeals and writ petitions in the group, ruling that the appellants failed to establish their claims regarding the construction of Section 52A, the jurisdiction of the High Court for immediate challenges against customs orders, and the applicability of fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(f) to non-citizen entities like foreign companies and corporations. The judgment highlighted the importance of following statutory procedures and refraining from circumventing the specialized appellate and revisional mechanisms provided under the Sea Customs Act.