K S JHALA Vs. N H HOKABAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the original complainant who has filed this Revision Application from the order passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 461 of 1981.

(2.) The fact of the present case are that the petitioner filed a complaint against the original accused on 18-4-1981 on the allegations that the accused had contravened the provisions of the Central Excise Act and the Rules because they had evaded the payment of excise duty. Department proceedings were held and the show cause notice dated 18-7-1977 was issued to the accused. The accused filed their reply and thereafter adjudication proceedings were held and the adjudication order was passed on 5-5-1980. According to the department, the accused did not file the prescribed D-3 declarations before the Central Excise Authorities within the stipulated time and they had also not made any entry in their statutory record in Form IV in respect of the consignment of the grey power loom fabrics receied by them before 2-2-1977. Hence 373 Takas of the cloth measuring approximately 19210.75 metres valued at Rs. 40,167.83 p.s. were seized. It was the case of the department that the accused did not account for 293 Takas valued at Rs. 39,750.00 which were received for processing and were in their possession. It was also the case of the department that the accused removed 8,47,650.20 metres of the fabrics after processing without payment of duty of excise leviable thereon and without maintaining any account in the statutory R. G. I. Register and without issuing gate passes and in manner contrary to law. According to the department, out of the total quantity of the above-stated fabrics, some bales of power loom cotton fabrics were seized from the godown of Textile Traders Co-operative Bank, Maskati Market, Ahmedabad and M/s. Sitaram Dwarkadas, situated at 271, New Cloth Market, Ahmedabad. According to the department, one more bale of processed power loom cotton fabric was seized from Rikhabchand Harakhchand and Co., Ahmedabad. Thus, according to the department, there was contravention of Rules 5A, 9 read with 173F and 173G(1) and 25A read with 173G(1) and all read with 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and, therefore, offence was committed by the accused under Sec. 9 of the Act.

(3.) Process was issued by the Court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Ahemadabad on the complaint being filed i.e. Criminal Case No. 461 of 1981. The prosecution had examined also the complainant and other officers.