LAWS(P&H)-2008-2-366

K K KAPOOR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On February 01, 2008
K K KAPOOR Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 9th February, 1987 at about 4.00 P.M., Central Excise Preventive Staff, Amritsar did the checking and verification of records of M/s. Niemla Textile Finishing Mills (P) Ltd., G.T. Road, Chheharta, Amritsar. On verification, evasion of central excise duty to the tune of Rs. 2,29,034.15 Ps. was found.

(2.) Complaint was filed. Vide order dated 7-1-1997 (Annexure P-2), the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar came to the conclusion that offence punishable under Section 9 of Central Excise Act is made out and the petitioner be charged to this effect. Present petition has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet (Annexure P-2) along with complaint (Annexure P-1).

(3.) Mr. Baldev Singh, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner has stated that there is no evidence or allegation to show that the petitioner, in his capacity as Director, has acted in any manner, which will attract penal provision calling for his trial. At the outset, the submissions of learned counsel may look attractive. In the Indian Penal Code except for Sections 34 and 149, which provide common intention and common object, unless made out, no person in his capacity as a Director by virtue of office can be held liable, as vicarious liability is alien to Indian Penal Code. But in Central Excise Act, this is not available as under Section 9(c) of the Central Excise Act, mental state on the part of the accused is to be presumed and there shall be a defence known to each accused to prove that there was no such mental state. Since the Act presume mental state, the presumption is rebuttable.