D. THILLAIRAJ Vs. BUREAU OF INDIAN STANDARDS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVISION Case is filed against the Judgment in CC No. 5272 of 2013 on the file of the learned XVIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Chennai.

(2.) MR . A. Thiyagarajan, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner that the revision case is filed only against the order of forfeiture of the properties seized.

(3.) INVITING the attention of this Court to Section 26 of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, relating to search and seizure, shall, so far as may be, apply to every search and seizure made under Section 26 of BIS Act. There is no dispute over the said submission. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that procedure contemplated under Sections 251 and 252 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has not been followed. Laying emphasize on the words "may have "it" employed under Section 33(2) of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the impugned Judgment, there is nothing to indicate as to whether any question was posed to the petitioners regarding the forfeiture of the properties. It is also the submission of the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner that the learned Magistrate ought to have considered that the goods are owned by the Company and do not belong to the individual Directors. According to him, pleading guilty by the Directors would not bind the Company.