9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the criminal proceedings should be stayed until the final adjudication of the show-cause notice by the Central Excise authorities. 2. The impact of pending appeals and adjudications on ongoing criminal proceedings. Detailed Analysis: 1. Stay of Criminal Proceedings Pending Final Adjudication: The petitioner, M/s. Lakme Limited, filed a revision application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Navsari, which rejected their plea to stay the criminal proceedings until the final adjudication of the show-cause notice by the Central Excise authorities. The criminal complaint was based on an order dated 16-3-1990 by the Collector of Central Excise, Baroda, which alleged non-payment of duty by the petitioner. The petitioner had appealed this order, and the Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Central Excise & Customs Collectorate, Baroda. The petitioners argued that the criminal proceedings should be stayed until the final decision on the show-cause notice, as the outcome of the adjudication would directly impact the criminal case. They cited several judgments, including the Supreme Court's ruling in G.L. Didwania v. Income Tax Officer, which held that criminal proceedings should not continue if an appeal on the same matter is pending and could potentially nullify the basis of the criminal case. 2. Impact of Pending Appeals and Adjudications: The petitioners relied on various judgments to support their argument: - In G.L. Didwania v. Income Tax Officer, the Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings as the basis of the complaint was nullified by the Appellate Tribunal's order. - The Gujarat High Court in Criminal Misc. Application No. 484/86 held that criminal proceedings should be stayed if the outcome of an appeal could nullify the basis of the complaint. - In Shri Digvijay Cement Co. Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, the court stayed criminal proceedings pending the outcome of an appeal before the Tribunal. - The Madhya Pradesh High Court in D & H Secheron Electrodes v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise ruled that criminal prosecution could not continue if the foundation of the complaint was nullified by the Tribunal's order. The petitioners contended that continuing the criminal proceedings would cause undue harassment and misery, as the final decision on the show-cause notice could potentially absolve them of the alleged evasion of duty. Judgment: The High Court quashed and set aside the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Navsari, and stayed the criminal proceedings until the final adjudication of the show-cause notice by the Collector, Central Excise, Surat. The court acknowledged that while this stay might result in an indefinite adjournment, it was necessary to prevent potential injustice and unnecessary harassment to the petitioner. The court emphasized that if the petitioner succeeded in the adjudication, the basis of the criminal prosecution would disappear, thereby justifying the stay. The court allowed the Criminal Revision Application, making the interim relief of staying the criminal proceedings absolute until the final adjudication of the show-cause notice. The petitioners were granted the liberty to move to the appropriate forum following the Collector's final decision.
|
