Criminal Miscellaneous No.21592 OF 1998 In the matter of an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure --------------- 1. Sri Narshim Singh S/O Mahraj Singh, P.O. & P.S. Galgalia, District-Purnea 2. Sri Subhash Ghosh, Son of Santosh Ghosh, P.O. & P.S. Galgalia, District-Purnea 3. Sri Ganesh Ghosh, Son of Kulachand Ghosh, At & P.O. Galgalia, District-Purnea --- Petitioners Versus 1. Union Of India through the Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Ministry Of Finance, North Block, New Delhi. 2. The Commissioner of Customs, Indo-Nepal Border, Central Revenue Building, Birchand Patel Marg,Patna- 800001 ---------- Opp.Parties. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR Rakesh Kumar, J No one appears on behalf of the petitioners either to press this application or to make a prayer for adjournment. However, Mrs Archana Sinha, Junior Standing Counsel to Sr. Standing Counsel for Customs Department appears on behalf of Opp.Party no.2. 2. The three petitioners, who were made accused in a Custom Case for commission of offence under Section 11 of the Customs Act, have approached this Court by way of invoking its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was prayed to - 2 - quash the entire criminal proceeding started against them for their punishment under Section 135 of the Customs Act in Complaint Case No.14 /94 dated 22.11.1994 in the Customs Case No.26/88 pending in the court of Presiding Officer, Economic Offence Court, Muzaffarpur. The petitioners were apprehended while they were smuggling contrabanned goods for an amount of Rs.20 lacs. From the conscious possession of petitioners 17 bullock carts loaded with 299 packages of polyester Testerised yarn valued Rs.19,56,960/- , 17 carts and 34 male buffaloes together valued Rs.51,000/-, total valued Rs.20 lacs and odd were recovered . In the petition, the main ground for quashing of the proceeding in the present case was that the confiscation proceeding, which was also initiated in respect of seized articles, has come to an end in petitioners’ favour. The Collector, Customs had passed a confiscation order against the petitioners and thereafter they rushed to the Court of Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Bench, Calcutta and filed an appeal before the said Tribunal and the Calcutta Bench allowed their appeal and exonerated them from the confiscation proceedings. On the - 3 - ground of their exoneration from the confiscation proceeding, the plea, as appears from the petition, has been taken that on the same set of evidence, the petitioners cannot be prosecuted by the Court of Economic Offences, Muzaffarpur. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Opp.Party no.2 has opposed the prayer and submits that confiscation proceeding as well as criminal proceeding are two different proceedings and only on the ground of exoneration from the confiscation proceeding they cannot be exonerated from the criminal charges. 4. I have examined the complaint petition and materials available on record. The petitioners have brought on record the order of Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal by way of annexing the same as Annexure-3/A. From the complaint petition, prima facie a case for commission of offence under the Customs Act is made out. Moreover, the plea of the petitioners that confiscation proceeding has ended in their favour has got no relevance with the criminal proceeding. The proceeding in Customs Case No.26/88 will be dependent on the evidences - 4 - brought on the record during the trial. The evidence and materials are to be looked into independently without taking any aid from the order of Customs Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal. Moreover, while exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. I am not inclined to examine those materials at this stage. 5. Accordingly, I find no merit in the petition and the petition stands rejected. Patna High Court, Patna Dated : the 23rd March,2010 Nawal Kishore Singh/N.A.F.R. ( Rakesh Kumar, J)