S NAGARAJAN Vs. VASANTHAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal has been directed against the order of acquittal passed by the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of I Class, Trivandrum in a complaint filed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Trivandrum, alleging that both the respondents committed offences punishable under S.135(1) of the Customs Act 1962. In acquitting the respondents the learned Magistrate based his decision mainly on the non production of the notifications or copies thereof issued by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by S.11B and 123(2) of the Customs Act which is referred to hereinafter as 'the Act' for short.

(2.) The notifications issued by the Central Government in exercise of the powers conferred by the above provisions were neither produced nor marked by the prosecution before the lower Court in this case. Accepting the contention raised by the counsel for the respondents the learned Magistrate took the view that the above notifications could not be taken judicial notice of by the court, since the said notifications are not laws in force within the meaning of S.57(1) of the Evidence Act. It is not disputed that the said notifications do not come under any other categories enumerated in clauses (2) to (13) of S.57 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which are required to be taken judicial notice of by the Court.

(3.) According to the learned Magistrate, as the prosecution failed to prove the said notifications the prosecution must fail. Thomas J. before whom the appeal came up for hearing doubted the correctness of a Division Bench ruling of this Court in Pyli v. State of Kerala ( 1966 KLT 102 ) which held that a Court cannot take judicial notice of notifications issued by the Government by virtue of the provisions of S.57 of the Evidence Act Accordingly, the learned Judge referred the matter to be heard and determined by a Bench of two Judges, and it is thus the matter came up before us.