1 465 r 1 1MJoMe 4 of2005 CRR No 87of 2003 1 Inthe HighCourt of Punjaband Haryanaat Chandigarh Dateof decisior 5e902oll C4 CrlMiscIoMe 44328 of 2005 1OSMl Union of India e e etitioner Versus 1 SlGoyal Respondent IO CrRevision No187 of 2003 1OSMl C5 I AKPandeyand others I e etitioners Z Versus C C X SGoyal 442espondent Z 4 CORAM HONBLE MRS JUSTICE SABINA Ql e 7 Present MrJagmohan Bansal Advocate Z for the ll MVikram ChaudharyAdvocate for respondent Ilrlk SABINA J Vide this order the above mentionedtwo petitions will be disposedof as the petitionershave soughtquashingof the criminal complaintNoJ4m1 dated 92002 under Sections 109 112 383 384 499 500 501 506 read with Section 12043 of the Indian Penal U Code 1860 PC for shortl Rani Anita 2012.06.22 14: 34 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 466 r1 of 2005 2 CRR No87 of 2003 Learned counselfor the has submittedthat the order dated 82002 is Iiableto be quashed The officials were merely in dlschargeof their official duties Thegoodsexportedbythe were seized and it was found thatthe value of the goodshad not been properlydisclosed by the In fact the goodsworth 2 195000 had been shown 1 to be of value worth 84000001 The had over valued the goodsimportedby it with a vievv to take the benefit of Duty 0 Ca EntitlementPassbook Scheme OEPB for shortl The fact that the I t5 complainant had over valued the goodswas upheldin a up to the ApexCourt However the detention order passedunder the Z Conservation of ForelgnExchangeand Prevention of Activities Act 1974 COFEPOSA for shol was set aside by this Court The officiais of Union of Indiacould not be summoned to face I CJ the trial for offence under Sections 3841500 IPC le allegation Z quaextortion Ievelled against accused Joh n Josepll were just to m pressurise the officialsbythe As per Section 155 of the m Z Custom Act 1962 le Act for shortlno IegaI shali Iie agalnstthe officials of the Central Government qua anythingdone under the Act in good faith Moreover no action could be taken againstthe officials for anythingunder the Act without givingone Inonths previousnotice in writingto the Central Government or after the expiryof three months of accrual of such cause 1 Learned counsel for the respondentson the other hand has submitted that the officials had got the news item published tl againstthe complalnantwith a view to defame him The detention Rani Anita 2012.06.22 14: 34 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 1 of 2005 3 CRR No 187 of2003 order passedunder the COFEPOSA had been set aside by this Coult PetitionerJohn Josephhad demanded a sum of 25000001 for savingthe cotnpla inant from the detention order and had him to withdraw the criminal complaintat Ludhiana However the had refused to pay the said amount The detentionorder was oolpublished InthQnews paper 1 After hearingIearnedcounsel for the parties am ofth Ill opinionthat the instant petitions deserve to be allowed 0 0 Press note dated 302000 Annexure Pe51reads as I undeo 0 I Whereas the Joint Secretary to the Government of India Z specialiy under sutsection 11of Section 3 of the Conservation of ForeignExchange and Prevention 0 of SmugglingActivities Act 1974 52 of 19741issued I 3 order F16731 2612000cusJl 1 dated 21 2000 under Z e1 the said sub sectoiondirectlng that Shri S P Goval son of Cll 1 ShJaqat Ram Goval resident of 201 Krishna Chambers 7 Z 59 New Marine Lines Mumbai 400 020 Proprietorof Qm Mls Chiraq Exports and Imports Industrial Area A Ludhianal 103A Krishna Chambers 59 New Marine Lines Mumbaie 400 020 and Partner of Mls Merchant Exports indial 864 IndustrialArea A Ludhianal 103A Krishna Chambers 59 New Marine Lines Mumbai100 020 be detoainedand keptIll custodyin the Central Prisor Mumbai with a view to hlm from smuggling goodsin future 11 Rani Anita 2012.06.22 14: 34 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 468 r PpP CrlMisclloa 44328of 2005 4 CRR No187 of2003 2Nhereas Central Government has reasons to believe that the aforesaid person has absconded or IS concealinghimself so that the order cannot be executecl Now therefore in exercise of the powers conferred by caluse ol of subsection 11of section 70f the said Act the Central Government herebydirects the 1 Q aforesaid person to appealbefore the Commissioner of 0 C43 Police Mumbai within 7 daysof the of this I order in the officialGazzette Il C40 I The were actingin dischargeof their official 1c Z dutles The complanantwas to exportball pointpens However it 2 was found that the said ball pointpens were over valued for the 0 purposeof DEPB A penaltyof 1000001 was imposedon the I r the matter qua over valuation of the goods Z was upheldup to the ApexCourt The was also sought 0 4r to be summoned qua order of detention passed under the m2 Z COFEPOSA However the said detention order was set aside by tl thls Court in a petitlonfiled by the complainant It is not a case where any had been made qua the dtention order withoutthere been any such order Although the detentionorder had been set aside by this Cou rt but the authorities had passedthe detention order againstthe complainant under the COFEPOSA The officialswere actingin discharge of their official dutyand had passed the detentionorder in goodfaith The allegations that accused John Josephhad raised a Rani Anita 2012.06.22 14: 34 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 469 0 CrlMisclloMe 44328 of 2005 5 CRR No87 of 2003 demand of 2 25OOOOOlmfrom the complainant appears to have been Ievelledbythe asa counter blast In the presentcase no moneyhas been paidbythe to the accused Onlyan oral has been Ievelledagainstthe official John Josephthat a demand of 2 25000001had been made byhim It is very easy to Ievelsuch kind of allegations againstan officer who had been acting 1m Itl discharge of his officialdutyin orderto save ones own sl One of the petitions has been filed byUnlon of Indiaseekingquashing of the 0 0 complaint Oll behalf of its official and one petitionhas been filed I C5 seekingquashingof the complaintbythe oHicialsthemselves In the Z facts and circumstances of the presentcase contlnuationof criminal 1r Z againstthe officials who were in dischargeof 1 their officialdutywould be nothing but an abuse of process of Iaw In rL 41 case the criminal are allowed to continue then in every I case of raid or seizure it would be difficultfor an official to performhis Z t dutyfearlessly r Accordinglythe presentpetitions are allowe Complaint w Z N3941 dated 9A002 under Sections 109 112 383 384 499 Il 500 501 506 read with Section 1203 of the IndianPenaI Code and all the subsequent arisingtherefrom quathe petiticjners are quashed ISABINAI JUDGE SeptemberS2011 anita l 1 4 U 9 Rani Anita 2012.06.22 14: 34 True Scanned Copy of the Original PHHC, Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document