CHARANJIT SINGH Vs. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this Petition under Section 452 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the original accused nos. 4 and 5 in case No. 433/s of 1987 of the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan magistrate Bombay, seek a direction quashing the process issued against them along with the accused Nos. 1 to 3 and 6 to 12 upon a complaint lodged by the Assistant Collector of Central excise, Bombay, for offences punishable under Sections 120-B of the Indian Penal Code r/w. Sections 9 (1) (b), 9 (1) (bb), 9 (1) (bbb), 9 (1) (c) read with Section 9 (1) (d) and 9 (1) (i) and 9-AA of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 as well as offences punishable under Sections 193 r/w. 192 i. P. C.

(2.) RESPONDENT No. 1 - Assistant Collector of Central Excises filed a complaint alleging that he was authorised to file a complaint for offences under the Central Excises and Salt Act and that he was a public servant. The accused No. 1 - M/s. Pure Drinks Pvt. Ltd. was a company manufacturing aerated water falling under Chapter No. 22 of the Central Excises Tariff holding a central Excises licence in form L-4 with effect from 22nd January, 1986. Under an agreement, accused No. 1 took on lease of M/s. Pure Drinks Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi. The Central Excise duty on excisable goods manufactured is to be paid by the manufacturer and for that purpose he is required to maintain a stock book in form paying RG - 1, a personal ledger Account and maintain sufficient deposit for the purpose of paying excise duty on the goods intended to be removed. The manufacturer is also required to make payments of excise duty by making a debit entry in the personal ledger account and then remove the goods by issuing gate pass in form gp-I. The goods can be removed only by issuing gate pass which is to accompany excisable goods to their first destination. It is alleged that on 4-9-1986 the officers of the Central Excises intercepted two motor vehicles at Mahalaxmi Railway Station while they were carrying glass bottles containing aerated water of the brand names allotted under, Chapter No. 22 of the Central excise Tariff. Two drivers gave their names and they were informed by the Excise Officers that those were excisable goods whereupon they produced two gate passes. The four gate passes showed payment of duty on the bottom valued at Rs. 7500/- and the debit entry No. 134 dated 4-9-1986 having been made in the personal ledger account. On verification, it was found that there were no such debit entries in the account from 1-5-1986 onwards evidencing payment of excise duty. Security of the gate pass books showed that accused No. 1 had removed large quantity of aerated water between 1-5-1986 to 4-9-1986 showing the payment of Central Excise duty by indicating also the debit entry on each gate pass, but no debit entries had been made in the personal ledger account during this period. It was discovered that the accused No. 1 had manufactured and removed large quantity of excisable goods without payment of duty fraudulently and dishonestly, and with an intention to evade payment of excise duty made false endorsements in R. G.- 1 and in the gate passed. The scrutiny of the record further revealed that goods collectively valued at Rs. 29,65,178. 70 ps. had been removed without payment of the excise duty amounting to Rs. 15,10,854. 30 ps. by fraudulently showing in the RG-1 and the gate passes that the entire duty on the goods removed had been paid. The goods seized were handed over to accused No. 6 who was a Deputy General Manager of the M/s. Pure Drinks Pvt. Ltd. at bombay under a bond. The investigation also showed that the accused No. 2 M/s. Pure Drinks pvt. Ltd. , New Delhi had taken on lease a factory of accused No. 1 under an agreement dated 22-1-1986 and that they were sister concerns managed by the same parties. It also alleged that the accused No. 1 indulged in evasion of Central Excise duty in the past also and had prepared false records to indicate that goods removed by accused a No. 1 had also failed and neglected to file the monthly returns in from RT-12 from May 1986 to avoid detection of non-payments of excise duty on the goods manufactured from May, 1986 to 4-9-1986 and they had entered into continuing criminal conspiracy for avoiding the excise duty had to facilitate the evasion with fabricated false evidence by making false entries in the registers and gate passes in pursuance of the conspiracy. Adjudication proceedings were initiated for the evasion. It was contended that the accused Nos. 3 to 12 were responsible for and were connected with the affairs and business of the accused No. 1 and they were working on responsible positions at Bombay and New Delhi and that at the relevant time the accused Nos. 2 to 12 were in-charge of and responsible to accused No. 1 for the affairs and business of accused No. 1. It is not necessary to set out the other details, stated in the complaint. Suffice it to say that excisable goods were removed in contravention of the provisions of Rules 99 (1), 173 and 52, 52-A, 54 read with Rules 173-G, 47 and 49 and Rule 173-G r/w. Rules 53 and 556 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 and that accused knew that the goods were liable for confiscation under Rule 173-G of the Central Excise Rules. Action was therefore sought under the aforesaid sections of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 and the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate passed an Order in the following term on 10-8-1977 :