9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the petitioners, being the accused has filed an application under Section 245 of Cr.PC, seeking discharge on various grounds. The said application came to be dismissed by the learned Magistrate on the ground that the order in question is not set aside rather the same is pending consideration before the Revisional Authority. When the fact that the revision preferred by respondent No. 1 is pending consideration before the Revisional Authority, no purpose would be served if the complainant is permitted to be proceed against the petitioners. At the same time, if the accused is discharged on the ground that the original order dated 30.09.2013 is set aside and the matter is remanded back for fresh consideration, that too when the same is challe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plaint dated 07.03.2017, instituted by respondent No. 1 and for such other directions as the Court deems fit to grant. 2. Heard Sri. Anirudha R.J. Nayak, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri. Jeevan J Neeralgi, Senior Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1. Perused the materials on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that petitioner No. 1 is a Private Limited Company and petitioner Nos. 2 to 4 are the Managing Director, Finance Head and Administrative-in-charge respectively, engaged in manufacture and export of readymade garments. During the relevant period of time, goods were exported to various countries from Bengaluru, by availing a Scheme framed under the Customs Act, 1962 referred to as the Duty Drawback Schem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Additional Commissioner for fresh consideration. This order remanding the matter to the Additional Commissioner for fresh consideration is challenged by respondent No. 1 before the Revisional Authority. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the same is pending consideration. These facts are not disputed by the learned counsel for respondent No. 1, but on the other hand, he also admits that the revision preferred by respondent No. 1 is pending consideration before the Revisional Authority. 5. With these admitted facts, I have considered the contentions taken by the petitioners. 6. Admittedly, on the basis of the original order dated 30.09.2013, produced as per Annexure-E, passed by the Additional Commissioner of Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
