9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs to accord sanction for prosecution. 2.Brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed in the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate by the Air Customs Officer, Indira Gandhi International Airport, to the effect that the Additional Collector of Customs, Indira Gandhi International Airport, has accorded sanction for prosecution of the petitioner herein by virtue of the powers vested under Section 137(1) of the Act which has authorised the complainant-respondent to file the complaint. It was alleged in the complaint that on the night of 10/11-9-1988, while checking of passengers bound for Bankok by Thai Airways flight No. TG-915 was in progress in the departure hall at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollars purchased from the Bank at the airport. A personal search was conducted in the presence of two independent witnesses which resulted in the recovery of foreign and Indian currency equivalent to Rs. 96,664.45 and upon the accused not being able to satisfactorily explain, the same was seized under Section 110 of the Act and panchnama drawn. It was the case of the complainant-respondent that in a statement under Section 108 of the Act, the accused admitted the aforesaid recovery seizure and other incriminating facts. The action of the accused had resulted in his having committed an offence punishable under Section 132 of the Act. It was stated that the accused knowingly and fraudulently evaded or attempted to evade all the prohibitions i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... been placed before the sanctioning authority, the material collected of the incident in question alone could not be termed as 'sufficient/relevant material'. He further argued that the matter has been pending trial for over 12 years and in view of the Supreme Court judgment in Raj Deo Sharma v. State of Bihar, VIII (1998) SLT 194 the criminal proceedings ought to be dropped. 4.Mr. Aggarwal, learned Counsel for the respondent-Customs argued that Mr. J.P. Singh, the complainant, has been examined twice before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and on both occasions the petitioner had opportunity to cross-examine him, but nowhere has any suggestion been given to him regarding the so-called complaints made against him and/or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and have carefully scrutinized the cross-examination of PW-1, Mr. J.P. Singh, which has run into many pages and stretched on for many days. I do not find any mention of the so-called complaints which, according to the petitioner, are relevant material. Therefore, it can safely be said that the trial court took cognizance of the offence on the strength of the sanction accorded by the Additional Collector and that the accused never raised any objections regarding sanction when his case was in the trial court. The case sought to be put up in the instant petition is a shot in the dark which was not even put to the witness and, therefore, is clearly an after-thought. On the question of delay, a status report was called for from the trial court w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
