Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 261/13 of 1979, decided on 22nd April, 1979.
--- S. 2(s)-Words and phrases-"Smuggle"-Definition.-[Words and phrases]. The word "smuggle" is defined in section 2(s) of the Customs Act, 1969. According to clause (a) of the definition, it is necessary that the articles recovered should be goods notified in the official Gazette and should not be less than Rs. 1,000 in value.
---- S. 2(a) & (b) read with Ss. 156(1) (89)-Alleged smuggled goods valuing less than Rs. 1,000, case, held, does not fall under cl. (a) Goods recovered at Railway Station-Not brought into Pakistan by any route other than a declared one-Clause (b), held, also not attracted-Proceedings quashed in circumstances-Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561-A.
Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for Petitioner.
Maqbool Ahmad II for the Department.
A case under section 156(1) (89) is pending against the petitioner before the Special Judge, (Customs) Central, Lahore. The case was started upon recovery of certain articles of foreign origin from the possession of the petitioner in the course of a search conducted by Muhammad Iqbal, Constable, on 1-1-1977 at Railway Station, Lahore. The articles recovered are of three categories; (1) three pieces of soap, (2) 21 yards cloth and (3) various items of crockery. The total value of these articles was put by the prosecution at Rs. 980. A report dated 7-1-1979 about the case was submitted by S. H. O., Railway Station, Lahore, before the Special Judge.
2. The petitioner has sought quashment of the case on the ground that upon the aforesaid recovery and also because of the illegal search 'Inducted by an unauthorised person, the prosecution is unwarranted.
3. The word "smuggle" is defined in section 2(s) of the Customs Act 1969. According to clause (a) of the definition, it is necessary that the articles recovered should be goods notified in the official Gazette and should not be less than Rs. 1,000 in value. It is submitted that only soap and cloth' are the notified items but not crockery. Since the total value put of the recovered items is Rs.-980, it cannot be said that the soap and cloth items could exceed Rs. 1,000, in value. The petitioner, therefore, cannot be prosecuted on the basis of the two items i.e. soap and cloth. The crockery not being a notified item, cannot be linked with the other two for the purposes of valuation. In any case, the total value is less than Rs. 1,000. The recovery therefore, does not lead to a case under clause (a). Learned counsel for the Department, however, submitted that clause (b) is attracted. This clause covers goods brought into Pakistan by any route other that a declared one. There is nothing in the F. I. R. or the challan to show that the goods had been brought into by a route other than a declared one.
4. In the circumstances, the prosecution is not maintainable. I, therefore, allow the application and quash the case against the petitioner now proceeding before the learned Special Judge under section 156(1) (89):
Proceedings quashed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer