S KANNAN Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is for the issue of certiorari to quash a show cause notice issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, dated 11-11-1993 , to the petitioner and 8 others.

(2.) THE petitioner came to be implicated while making investigations against certain persons who were involved in the illegal export of sandalwood logs/billets etc. In the criminal cases directed against the said third parties, the matter had come up to this Court in Crl. O. P. Nos. 5540, 5542 and 5922 of 1993. While dismissing those petitions this Court had observed that it was better if the C. B. I. had taken up the investigation, because there was some suspicion as to the involvement of certain Customs officials also. It is under those circumstances that the impugned show cause notice came to be served on the petitioner calling upon him to submit his explanation. Similar show cause notice had been issued to the three persons who had filed the Crl. O. Ps. before this Court and certain others also. THE show cause notice is challenged on two grounds. (1) THE first respondent who issued the show cause notice has no pecuniary jurisdiction to issue the notice having regard to section 122 of the Customs Act which prescribes the pecuniary limit of the officers. THE second ground of attack is that when this Court had directed the c. B. I. to enquire into the matter, the show cause notice has been issued with a mixed motive to help the Customs officers, who might be involved in the case. THE writ petition was admitted on 16-12-1993 and interim injunction was also granted. THE respondents have filed a petition viz. , W. M. P. No. 23695 of 1994 to vacate the interim injunction and in support of the petition have filed a detailed counter-affidavit. In the counter-affidavit it is stated that on specific intelligence gathered by the Special Investigation Branch of the Madras custom House, an inspection was conducted in respect of two containers tendered for export. It was found that though the shipping bills had referred to the export of mica powder, the bulk of the containers carried sandalwood to the value of Rs. 64, 27, 715/- and peacock feathers to the value of Rs. 16, 80, 000/ -. THE goods were seized and on investigation the impugned show cause notice was issued. Regarding the points taken in the writ petition it is pointed out that the show cause notice specifically says that the explanation should be submitted to the second respondent-Collector of Customs who is the proper adjudicating authority under Section 122 of the Act. Regarding the second contention it is stated that the question of prosecution is totally different from adjudication proceedings under the Act and that there was no motive in issuing the show cause notice. While considering the miscellaneous petitions, the decision of Raju, J. in W. P. No. 7839 of 1994 [reported in 1995 (76) ELT 539 (Mad.)] was brought to my notice and I had decided to take up the writ petition itself for final disposal. At the request of the counsel for the petitioner, I gave one adjournment to enable the petitioner to argue the case, elaborately.

(3.) IN fine, I find that there is no substance in the writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed. There will be no order as to costs. .