UNION OF INDIA Vs. HUKMICHAND JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the accused was not represented, this court appointed Ms Ayushi Anandpara as Amicus Curaie. I have to note the immense assistance of Ms Anandpara.

(2.) The Union of India, through Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Mumbai, has impugned an order and judgment dated 16-4- 1998 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Mumbai, acquitting the accused of offence under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) 1947 (the said Act).

(3.) It is the case of appellant that respondent no.2 through respondent no.1 applied to the office of Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Mumbai, for granting imprest licence in terms of paragraph 3 of Appendix 13 of Import Policy AM 85-88 for import of rough diamonds, uncut and unset. Appellant states that respondent no.2 was issued licence with certain export obligations mentioned in the licence. It is the case of appellant that these obligations were not met, though time was extended twice and, therefore, respondent nos.1 and 2 have committed an offence under Section 5 of the said Act. Of course, appellant also alleged that the original licence, itself was obtained by respondent nos.1 and 2 by submitting two forged and fabricated export orders. I have to note that the charge framed does not contain any charge of forgery and the charge is only that respondent nos.1 and 2 have not fulfilled the export obligations under the licence issued and, therefore, are guilty of offence under Section 5 of the said Act. The charge framed is for contravening conditions of licence and thereby committing an offence punishable under Section 5 of the said Act.