9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (9) TMI 82X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eared parcels of dutiable computer parts without collecting the duty payable thereon and thereby caused extensive loss to the Customs Department and wrongful gain to the petitioner and other accused. The order passed by the Tribunal clearly indicates that the petitioner has been exonerated of the charges on merits. Under the said circumstances, the prosecution of the petitioner on the same set of facts and circumstances cannot be allowed to continue. Hence, the petition deserves to be allowed and the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed. Petition allowed - decided in favor of petitioner. - Criminal Petition No. 2710 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 20-2-2019 - John Michael Cunha, J. Shri S. Raghu, Advocate, for the Pet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... equently dismissed the application filed by the petitioner and remitted the matter to the Learned Magistrate with a direction to proceed with the case against Accused No. 1. The petitioner has called in question the initiation of the proceedings against him as well as the order passed by the Learned Sessions Judge dated 18-2-2013 in Criminal Revision Petition No. 373/2012. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect of the very same accusations, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and after elaborate enquiry, the petitioner was exonerated of similar charges. Further, adjudication proceedings was also taken up against the petitioner before the adjudicating authority under Section 112 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... corresponding wrongful gain to the petitioner and other accused. 6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the proceedings in the instant case are also based on similar accusations and hence prosecution of the petitioner amounts to double jeopardy and is therefore liable to be quashed. In support of his submissions, Learned Counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Radheshyam Kejriwal v. State of West Bengal reported in 2011 (266) E.L.T. 294 (S.C.) and would submit that the petitioner having been exonerated on merits in the adjudication proceedings, criminal prosecution on the same set of facts and circumstances cannot be allowed to continue. 7. Learned Counsel for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Court in Special [Corruption] Case No. 183/2007 reveals that on the very same accusations, the petitioner herein was prosecuted and after trial, he has been acquitted. Though Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order passed by the Special Judge in Special [Corruption] Case No. 183/2007 is challenged before this Court and the said order has not become final, yet the fact remains that on the very same allegations, adjudication proceedings were taken up against the petitioner in Adjn.BNG.II/1641 and Adjn. BNG.II/1650, dated 27-2-2009. Though the petitioner was found guilty in the said adjudication proceedings, ultimately, the Tribunal in its Final Order No. 22652-22653/2017, dated 30-10-2017 has exonerated the petitioner of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (i) Adjudication proceeding and criminal prosecution can be launched simultaneously. (ii) Decision in adjudication proceeding is not necessary before initiating criminal prosecution. (iii) Adjudication proceeding and criminal proceeding are independent in nature to each other. (iv) The finding against the person facing prosecution in the adjudication proceeding is not binding on the proceeding for criminal prosecution. (v) Adjudication proceeding by the Enforcement Directorate is not prosecution by a competent Court of law to attract the provisions of Article 20(2) of the Constitution or Section 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (vi) The finding in the adjudication proceedi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
