DEL AGHA Vs. RAKESH GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 4th January, 2002 passed by ACMM, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi dismissing the application of petitioner/accused under Section 210 Code of Criminal Procedure

(2.) Connected with the recovery of Chinese silk textile on 28/08/2000 from Ms.Olga Kozireva/accused, a complaint under-Sections 132 and 135 of Customs Act, 1962 has been filed by the Customs and RC.5(E)/2001 under Sections 120-B Indian Penal Code read with 420 Indian Penal Code and 13(l)(d)(2) of P.C.Act, 1988 and substantive offences under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1 )(d) of P.C. Act has also been registered by SIU(IX) branch, CBI. Latter case is still under investigation. In the complaint, the petitioner filed application under Section 210 Code of Criminal Procedure for stay of proceedings till the police report under Section 173 Code of Criminal Procedure was filed in the case registered by CBI and by the order under challenge the application has been dismissed by ACMM, Patiala House Courts before whom the complaint is pending. Section 210 Code of Criminal Procedure which is material, is reproduced below:-

(3.) Main thrust of argument advanced by Sh.Sidharth Aggarwal for petitioner was that by notification No.25-3-60-AVD-II dated 1/04/1964, CBI has been authorised to investigate offences punishable under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act and said case registered by CBI (copy of FIR at pages 102 to 110) also notices allegations regarding commission of offences under said two Sections of the Customs Act and CBI, thus, can investigate the offences under said two Sections in addition to offences for which the case has been registered by it. Therefore, the trial court had acted erroneously in declining to stay proceedings in complaint case under Section 210 Code of Criminal Procedure On the other hand, it was pointed out by Sh.A.K.Dutt for CBI that CBI is conducting investigation pertaining to offences for which the case was registered and not for offences under the Customs Act. Under Section 5 P.C. Act, 1988, Special Judge appointed under Section 3 of that Act takes cognizance of offence(s) without the accused being committed to him for trial. In the event the allegations concerning violation of Sections 132 & 135 of the Customs Act are investigated in addition to offences for which case was registered by CBI, the charge sheet for all the offences will have to be filed before the Special Judge and it cannot be clubbed with the complaint for trial by ACMM, Patiala House Courts as envisaged by said sub-section (2) of said Section 210, nor can the Special Judge transfer to his Court the complaint filed under Sections 132 & 135 by the Customs pending before ACMM, Patiala House Courts. Obviously, in such a situation Section 210 Code of Criminal Procedure is inapplicable and stay of proceedings in complaint case cannot be sought under that provision. Decisions in Maharashtra Tubes Ltd. Vs. State Induatrial & Investment Corporation of Maharaahtra Ltd. and Anr,. (1993) 2 SCC 144, Board of Muslim Wakfs, Rajastan Vs. Radha Kishan and Ors,. (1979) 2 SCC 468, Chandroji Rao Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax M.P. Nagpur. 1970 (2) SCC 23 and T.T.Antony Vs. State of Kerala and Ors., (2001) 6 SCC 181 relied on behalf of petitioner have no applicability on the issue in hand. Revision petition, thus, deserves to be dismissed being without any merit. Dismissed as such.