9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 749X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t an accused person must be tried under the provisions of the Code and the High Court would be reluctant to interfere with the said proceedings at an interlocutory stage. The continuation of the prosecution against the applicants would be illegal and nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court - Application allowed. - APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4526 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 9-1-2020 - Manish Kumar, J. For the Applicant : Atul Mehra For the Opposite Party : Govt. Advocate ORDER MANISH KUMAR, J. Heard Shri Atul Mehra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and examined the record. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicants for quashing the charge-sheet dated 26.05.1995, order dated 17.1.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Allahabad by which the the learned court below rejected the discharge application moved by the applicants in Criminal Case No.294 of 2004 registered under Sections 41/411 I.P.C. at Police Station Daraganj, District Allahabad and the revisional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the applicants has further contended that Sales/Trade Tax Revision No.597 of 2002 was preferred before this Court,under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act against the order of the Tribunal dated 26.08.2002, by which the Tribunal has confirmed the penalty imposed on the assessee/applicants for a sum of ₹ 1,50,000/- under Section 15A(1)(o) and the said revision was allowed by this Court by setting aside the order of the Tribunal vide it order dated 09.08.2010. It will be useful to quote the relevant part of the order absolving the applicants from imposition of any penalty under the Act. It reads as follows:- The present revision has been filed by the assessee under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax against an order of the Tribunal dated 26.08.02, by which the Tribunal has confirmed the penalty imposed on the assessee for a sum of ₹ 1,50,000/- under Section 15A(1)(o). The facts of the case are that the goods of the assessee were seized at Allahabd. He was carrying his goods from Agra to Indore. After the seizure was made, a penalty was also imposed on the assessee under Section 15A(1)(o). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contentions raised on behalf of the applicants and apprise this Court about the scope of interference by the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He has further contended that there is no illegality in the order dated 17.01.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, for the reason by that time the order of Sales/Trade Tax Revision No.597 of 2002 was not in existence and the revisional authority has rightly rejected the said revision vide its order dated 07.10.2008 as not maintainable against the interlocutory orders and there is no illegality or perversity in the orders. After hearing the counsel for both the parties and examining the records, the questions which arise for consideration are as follows:- (i) whether after the judgment dated 09.08.2010 passed by this Court in Sales/Trade Tax Revision No.597 of 2002 any criminal proceedings or prosecution could be continued against the applicants. (ii) whether the applicants are not entitled for the benefit of Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent the abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The order dated 17.1.2007 passed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed below:- 41. Special law .-A special law is a law applicable to a particular subject. The reference of Special Law under Section 41 in the present case is U.P. Trade Tax Act and under Sub-section 3 of Section 14 of U.P. Trade Tax Act, provides that no court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act, or the Rules made thereunder except with the previous sanction of the [Commissioner] whereas, there is no previous sanction of the Commissioner. Section 14(3) is quoted below:- 14. Offences and penalties. -(1) Any person who - (3) No court shall take cognizance of any offence under this Act, or the Rules made thereunder except with the previous sanction of the [Commissioner], and no court inferior to that of a Magistrate of the 1st class shall try any such offence. The applicants are also entitled for the benefit of Section 5 Cr.P.C. Section 5 Cr.P.C. is quoted below:- 5. Saving.- Nothing contained in this Code shall, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, affect any special or local law for the time being in fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
