LAWS(CAL)-1986-1-35

SAMBHUNATH KARMAKAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On January 20, 1986
SAMBHUNATH KARMAKAR Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner carries on business as jeweler at Alamganj, Ghatal in the district of Midnapore. On 26th April, 1963 Central Excise Officers conducted a raid at the shop of the petitioner and seized primary gold weighing 252.96C gms. new ornaments of gold having purity of more than 14 carat weighing 38.636 grms. After the seizure of the said gold the Superintendent of Central Excise (Gold Control) served a notice upon the petitioner to show cause why the said gold seized under Rules 126-C, 126-F, 126-G and 126-H of the Defence of India (Amendment) Rules 1963 should not be confiscated. The petitioner submitted his explanation. By an order dated 10th January, 1964 Collector of Central Excise Calcutta and Orissa held the petitioner guilty of violation of the Rules 126-C, 12'6-F, 126-G and 126-H of the said Rules and directed as follows :-

(2.) A criminal case was also initiated against the petitioner for being in possession of primary gold and not keeping accounts as required under the Notification of the Government of India. The petitioner was also charged with acquiring or accepting primary gold in contravention of the provisions of the relevant Rules. The petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charges but he was convicted. On appeal the petitioner was acquitted in respect of the charge as regards acquisition and acceptance of the primary gold. Thereafter, the petitioner moved this court in revision and the petitioner was acquitted in respect of the other charge of having in possession of the primary gold. After acquittal of the petitioner for contravention of the Defence of India (Amendment) Rules, 1963, the petitioner applied for releases of the said gold and for reconsideration of the decision made on 10th January, 1964.

(3.) The said application was rejected by the Superintendent of Central Excise (Gold Control) by his order dated 7th May, 1966. The reasons given for rejection of the said application for release of the gold ornament and reconsideration of the order dated 10th January, 1964 is as follows :-