9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Complaint filed for offences under Customs Act and Imports and Exports (Control) Act. 2. Accused seeking quashing of the complaint. 3. Allegations of importing components at concessional rates. 4. Accused No. 2's age and role in the company. 5. Quashing of complaint against Accused No. 2. Analysis: 1. The Assistant Collector of Customs filed a complaint against multiple accused persons, including a company and its directors, for offenses under the Customs Act and the Imports and Exports (Control) Act. The complaint alleged that the accused company imported components and parts of computers at concessional rates by manipulating certificates issued by the Department of Electronics. Various discrepancies were identified, leading to the accusation that the accused company wrongly availed the benefit of concessional import duty. 2. One of the accused, referred to as Accused No. 2, filed a petition seeking the quashing of the complaint against him. He claimed that he was not actively involved in the affairs of the company, being 82 years old and leading a retired life. However, the court found that the petitioner's age at the time of the alleged offense was not a valid reason for quashing the complaint. The court noted that the petitioner had previously filed a similar petition, which was rejected. Therefore, the court deemed the current petition as a misuse and abuse of the legal process. 3. The court emphasized that the petitioner's level of involvement in the company's business would be a matter of evidence to be determined during the trial. Despite the petitioner's claims of being a passive director, the court ruled that the complaint could not be quashed solely based on his assertions. The court dismissed the petition against Accused No. 2, imposing a cost of Rs. 5,000 but exempting him from personal appearance before the court, except when his presence is specifically required. In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues of alleged customs violations, the role of an accused director in a company, and the grounds for seeking the quashing of a complaint. The court rejected the petition filed by Accused No. 2, emphasizing that age alone was not a sufficient reason to dismiss the charges and that the level of involvement would be determined during the trial proceedings.
|
