Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jiwan Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Another on 5 August, 2013
Author: Ritu Bahri
Bench: Ritu Bahri
Crl. Misc. No. M-16066 of 2012 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-16066 of 2012 (O&M)
Date of decision : 05.08.2013
Jiwan Kumar ....Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. Harish Goyal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Amrit Pal Singh Gill, AAG, Punjab
****
RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)
This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of F.I.R No. 100 dated 11.07.2010 u/s 420 IPC (P-1) registered at P.S. Talwandi Sabo, Distt. Bhatinda.
The above said F.I.R has been registered against the petitioner on the allegations that one vehicle bearing No. PB-29-D (T) 3120 is carrying 120 gunny bags of sugar was going from Kalanwali to Maud Mandi. On checking, it was found that these goods were carrying without bill etc. without giving information at I.C.C. Thus, they have evaded the tax as per The Punjab Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas Act, 2000 (Punjab Act No. 9 of 2000) (for short ' the Act') and as such he has committed an offence under Section 420 IPC.
At the very outset learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a judgment passed by this Court in a case of Pritpal Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, decided on 05.03.2012 in CRM No. M-26116 of 2010 Arora wherein Gaurav on a 2013.09.28 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-16066 of 2012 (O&M) -2- complainant made by Malwinder Singh Dhillon, Excise and Taxation Officer (the complainant in the present case as well), a complaint was registered under Section 420/120-B/186/34 IPC for an offence of evading payment of Tax. However, the proceedings were quashed by this Court.
In a reply filed in the present petition, the factual position has been admitted. However, the registration of the F.I.R is being justified on the ground that they have embezzeled with the tax of the government and committed an offence under Section 420 IPC. Challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C has been presented and the charges have been framed, as per information given by ASI Roop Singh.
Petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and had paid the entry tax of Rs.7320/- vide receipt No. 58/895 dated 10.07.2010, even before the registration of the F.I.R.
Section 4 of the Act reads as under:-
"4. Detention of scheduled goods and levy of penalty- (1) If a person liable to pay tax under this Act, fails to pay the tax, the Excise and Taxation Officer, after hearing the said person and for the reasons to be recorded iw riting, may order detention of such goods. (2) If the officer referred to in sub section (1), is satisfied that the person carrying the scheduled goods, willfully failed to pay the tax, he may after giving the person a reasonable opportunity of being heard, direct him to pay by way of penalty in addition to the tax payable, a sum not exceeding twice the amount of tax.
(3) The goods detained under sub Section (1), shall be released after the Arora Gaurav 2013.09.28 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-16066 of 2012 (O&M) -3- recovery of the tax or penalty or both, as the case may be. (4) If the amount of tax or penalty, as the case may be, referred to in sub Section (3), is not paid by the importer within sixty days from the date of order levying tax or penalty the officer concerned shall have the power to sell the goods by public auction in the prescribed manner. The remainder amount, if any, left after the recovery of tax and penalty and after deducting the expenses on auction, shall be refundable to the person concerned."
The petitioners have already paid the entry tax as per the provisions of the Act on 10.07.2007 vide receipt No. 895 to the tune of Rs.6100/- (P-2 colly). The goods has also been released vide Annexure P-2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no offence under the Indian Penal Code was made out and secondly, even if the allegations as levelled in the FIR are taken to be true, no criminal offence can be said to be made out, if anybody enters in Punjab State from any other State through unauthorized passage that too evade tax, then only penal provisions are of penalty etc. as provided under the VAT Act and that too if the person is apprehended at the spot along with the goods. At the best, it is a case of civil nature as provided under the Punjab VAT Act. As per the provisions of Punjab Vat Act, a person without the documents or with no genuine documents carrying the articles in the goods vehicle, is liable to be punished with penalty of 30% of the value of the goods.
The allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R are that the petitioner had made an effort to evade the payment of entry tax while getting the goods from one state to another. Now the present F.I.R under Section 420 IPC is an abuse of process of law. Arora Gaurav
2013.09.28 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-16066 of 2012 (O&M) -4- In view of the above discussion, the present petition is allowed and F.I.R No. 100 dated 11.07.2010 u/s 420 IPC (P-1) registered at P.S. Talwandi Sabo, Distt. Bhatinda is quashed along with consequential proceedings.
05.08.2013 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE Arora Gaurav 2013.09.28 11:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document