Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 535/M in 409/Q of 1975, decided on 12th March 1976.

‑‑‑ S. 185‑A(6) read with Customs General Order No. 19 of 1974, No. 26 of 1975 and Criminal Procedure Code (V of 189:), S. 561‑A --Cognizance, taking of.‑‑Quashment of criminal proceedings--Superintendent of Police‑Only authorised Police Officer to lodge complaint before Special Judge (Customs), as required under subsection (6) of S. 185‑A, Customs Act‑Cognizance taken by Special Judge upon a complaint filed by a Sub‑Inspector of Police, held, not warranted by law and of no validity‑Proceedings quashed, .in circumstances. ‑[Quashment of criminal proceedings].

Malik Mehmood Majid Khan for Petitioners.

Mahmoodul Hassan Qureshi for the State.

This is an application filed under section 561‑A, Cr. P. C. praying that the proceeding initiated before the Special Judge (Customs and Taxation) Lahore, against the petitioners on the basis of police challan be quashed.

2. The main ground which has come up for consideration is that the learned Special Judge (Customs and Taxation), Lahore, could not take cognizance on the basis of the challan submitted by a Sub‑Inspector of police who is not authorized in this regard under section 185‑A, sub section (6) of the Customs Act of 1969. Subsection (6) relates to taking cognizance of a case by the Special Judge, and reads: ‑

"(6) Custom.‑A Special Judge shall take cognizance of, and have jurisdiction to try, an offence triable under subsection (3) only upon a complaint in writing made by such officer of Customs, or such other person invested with the powers of an officer of Customs, as may be authorized by the Central Board of Revenue in this behalf by a general or special order in writing.

Learned counsel for the petitioners had, during the hearing, submitted various notifications orders issued from time to time under the aforesaid provision of subsection (6). However, by way of abundant caution, I had issued a direction to the Collector of Customs, Lahore, to depute an official of his to produce before this Court all the relevant notifications in this regard. In response to the direction Mr. Muzaffar Hussain, Office Superin tendent Customs Collectorate, has appeared with the relevant departmental file. The lower Court's record shows that the matter had been reported to the police on 27‑7‑1974 and the challan which is dated 20‑8‑15)74 had been received in the Court of the Special Judge on 30‑12‑1974. The challan had been submitted by the District Inspector of Police, Chak Jhumra, district Lyallpur and had been forwarded by the D. S. P.

2. According to tile first order of authorization under subsection (6) i. e. Customs General Order No. 19 of 1974 dated 25‑10‑1974, only the I.G. of Police of the Province, in the Police Organization, had been authorized to file complaint. This order was in operation at the time the challan had been received in the Court. This Customs General Order No. 11) as amended subsequently by Customs General Order No. 15 of 1975, dated 23‑2‑1975, had been superseded by Customs General Order No. 26 of 1975 dated 26‑7‑1975. But by this order, too, the officer in the Police Organization A authorised in this regard, is the Superintendent of Police. Obviously there a no proper complaint in the case. Cognizance could be taken by the Special Judge only upon a complaint file,' by a person authorised under the law. The cognizance taken by the Special Judge is, therefore, not warranted by law and the proceeding against the petitioners has no validity, 1, there fore, quash the present proceeding.

Proceeding quashed

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.