UNION OF INDIA Vs. ASHOK SUKHDEOSING CHAVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this Criminal Appeal No. 150 of 1987, the Union of India through the Assistant Collector, Custom and Central Excise, Division Amravati, Amravati has challenged the acquittal of the respondent Ashok Sukhdeosingh Chavan. The respondent Ashok was tried by Shri Arun D. Kulkarni, Chief Judicial Magistrate Amravti in Criminal Case No. 48 of 1985 Union of India v. Ashok, for the offence under sections 11-C, 11-D, 11-E and 11-F, of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Notified Goods Rules, 1989, punishable under section 15 of the Customs Act. Mr. Natu, the learned Counsel for the appellant Union of India, assailed the acquittal on various grounds. The learned Counsel for the Union of India has argued that the findings given by the learned trial Court are pulpably wrong or manifestly erroneous. So also, he submitted that the reasons given by the learned trial Court are shocking. He also further contended that the reasons given for acquittal by the learned trial Court are not only untenable but perverse and legally erroneous and, therefore, the order of acquittal deserves to be set aside and the respondent be punished according to law. Mr. Natu the learned Counsel for Union of India has argued that the High Court in hearing the appeal against the order of acquittal has full power to review and re-assess the evidence on record and reach its own conclusions upon its estimate of the evidence.

(2.) IN nutshell, the facts leading to the institution of the criminal case against the respondents-accused are as under : the complainant-Union of India on whose behalf the Assistant Collector, Customs and Central Excise, Division Amravti, who is the public servant, has filed the complaint against the respondent Ashok Chavan and the case was registered as Criminal Case No. 48 of 1985. The Collector Custom and Central Excise, Nagpur, has, in exercise of the powers conferred on him under section 137 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (now called as an "act"), has authorised the Assistant Collector to file the complaint against the respondent-accused for the offence publishable under section 135 of the Act.

(3.) IN the year 1980-82 the respondent accused was serving as a Manager of M/s. Vikas Watch Corporation, Saroj Chowk, Amravati. On 6-4-1981 Anti Smuggling Squad of Head Quarters Officer, Nagpur had seized contraband wrist watches/and other goods valued at Rs. 21,550/- from the possession, custody and control of the respondent accused. Proceedings were instituted against the respondent accused and in the departmental adjudication proceedings, penalty of Rs. 1,000/- was imposed upon the accused. He paid the penalty.