9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (7) TMI 227X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ained for over two days and later on shown arrested under the provisions of Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short "the 1962 Act") and on medical examination, injuries were found on his person. He was, thereafter, released on bail. Bank accounts were also ordered to be seized, later on de-freezed. Petitioner No. 1 filed a criminal complaint on 18-2-2005 alleging wrongful confinement, physical torture and defamation, which is stated to be at a stage of preliminary evidence. On 31-3-2005, the order of detention under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 was passed. In the grounds, it is mentioned that the raw material imported without import duty was clandestinely diverted and for fulfilling export obligations, sub-standard material was procured and supplied. Order of detention was challenged and vide judgment dated 10-3-2006 reported in Rajinder Arora v. Union of India and others, 2006 (4) SCC 796, Hon'ble Supreme Court quashed the order of detention on the ground of delay in passing and executing the order. It was also noticed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that no prosecution has been initiated nor any show ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs Act, 1962 for above mentioned acts of omission and commission which have rendered the subject goods liable to confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962." 6. We do not find any merit in the submission made and are unable to hold that the provisions of Section 11 of the 1992 Act exclude the proceedings under the 1962 Act. The Customs Act provides machinery to ensure that there is no evasion of customs duty laid down. In a given case, evasion of customs duty as well as violation under the 1992 Act may be involved. It cannot be held that once there is allegation of violation of 1992 Act, jurisdiction of the Customs authorities is taken away. As is clear from show cause notice quoted above, there are allegations of violation of provisions of the 1962 Act. Jurisdiction of Customs Authority cannot be thus, held to be excluded. 7. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that once redemption certificate had been issued and authorities under the 1992 Act do not hold any violation, the customs authorities will cease to have jurisdiction in the matter is also without any merit. So long as there are allegations of evasion of duty, jurisdiction of customs aut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... different purposes without fatal inconsistency or repugnancy." "10........We are, therefore, unable to find any cogent or convicting reason for holding that the Parliament intended by enacting the Essential Commodities Act or the Fruit Order to impliedly repeal the provisions of the Adulteration act and the Rules in respect of the vinegar in dispute. Both the statutes can function with full vigour side by side in their own parallel channels. Even if they happen to some extent to overlap, Section 26 of the General Clauses Act fully protects the guilty parties against double jeopardy or double penalty. This section lays down that where an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more enactments then the offender shall be liable to be prosecuted and punished under either or any of those enactments but shall not be liable to be punished twice for the same offence. If, therefore, the provisions of the Adulteration Act and those of Fruit Order happen to constitute offences covering the same acts or omissions then it would be open to the prosecuting authorities to punish the offender under either of them subject to the only condition that a guilty person should not be punish ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Parliament can constitutionally and validly enact two statutes creating two sources of power, and since under both the statutes prices of fertilizers can be regulated, there is no illegality in acting under 'either' or 'both'. Counsel, however, seeks support from the following passage from Craies On Statute Law (Statute Law of Craies, 7th Edition, page 222): - "Acts of Parliament sometimes contain general enactments relating to the whole subject matter of the statute and also specific and particular enactments relating to certain special matters; and if the general and specific enactments prove to be in any way repugnant to one another, the question will arise, which is to control the other? In Pretty v. Solly, (1859) 26 Beav. 606, 610, Romilly M.R. stated as follows what he considered to be the rule of construction under such circumstances, 'the general rules', said he, 'which are applicable to particular and general enactments in statutes are very clear; the only difficulty is in their application. The rule is that whenever there is a particular enactment and a general enactment in the same statute, and the latter, taken in its most comprehensive sense, would overrule the form ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
