Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: areca nut in Ali Trading And Anr vs The State Of Assam And 6 Ors on 25 November, 2019Matching Fragments
11. In the aforesaid background, the writ petitions preferred by the appellants herein was given a final consideration by the common judgment and order dated 25.10.2019.
12. In the proceeding before the learned Single Judge, it was the contention of the appellants/writ petitioners that the goods in question were seized by the police authorities of Assam on the premises that the trucks carrying the areca nuts were moving from Cachar in Assam towards the State of West Bengal with proper documents and therefore, for the purpose, no detention and seizure of the trucks containing the areca nuts could have been made. In response thereof, it was the contention of the police authorities that under Section 4(2) of the CrPC, the police authorities can investigate any offence, including an offence under the GST Act. Further, an ejahar had also been lodged before the Jalukbari police station alleging that fraud and forgery could be detected in the tax documents submitted by the appellants and hence, over and above it would also be an offence under Sections 120(B)/420/467/471 of the IPC. It being so, a seizure is permissible under the law under Section 102(1) of the CrPC. Further, as communicated by the authorities under the DRI, there are also allegation of violations under the Customs Act and it also being an offence, the same would be within the purview of the investigation initiated by the police authorities. The ejahar dated 03.09.2019 had been registered as Jalukbari PS Case No.1362/2019.
Per-contra, it was the contention of the appellants that Section 4(2) of the CrPC cannot be invoked in respect of an offence under the GST Act or the Customs Act inasmuch as, the provisions of the two Acts are self-contained for the purpose of investigation and prosecution and hence, the detention of the goods by the police authorities cannot stand justified by referring to any offence that may have been committed under the GST Act or the Customs Act.
13. The learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 25.10.2019 arrived at its conclusion that the police authorities of Assam would have the jurisdiction to investigate certain offences under the Indian Penal Code, if made out, even though such offences may also be offences under the GST Acts or the Customs Act subject to the provisions of Section 26 of the General Clauses Act that no one will be liable to be punished twice for the same offence. The learned Single Judge was also of the view that although the trucks containing the areca nuts were seized essentially for fraud and forgery, their investigative role would primarily be confined to forgery of documents and cannot investigate whether Page No.# 6/12 there was any violation of the Customs Act. Accordingly, it was held that as regards the violation of the Customs Act, it would be appropriate for the police to hand over the investigation to the Customs authority so far as it relates to the allegations of smuggling. Similarly for the violation of the taxation laws under the AGST Act, it was held that the police authorities would have no jurisdiction and power to investigate such violation and the same would be governed by the provisions of the GST Acts under which a separate procedure for investigation is provided for. However in paragraph-53 of the judgment it was also provided that even if the statutes permit independent and separate investigation, but if such investigations involved coercive actions, similar to as contemplated under the CrPC, the investigations ought to be undertaken simultaneously, or else there would be a distinct possibility of infraction of the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 21 and 22. Further, as the documents produced revealed the commission of the principal offence under the Customs Act, it would be appropriate to hand over the investigation to the authorities under the customs department for further investigation under the Customs Act along with the seized goods and trucks. It was held that the initial seizure of the areca nuts and the trucks by the police authorities of Assam cannot be said to be without authority. Accordingly, it was concluded that no case for interference was made out for acceding to the prayer in the writ petitions for a declaration that the detention of the trucks containing the areca nuts was illegal and unsustainable.
29. We have also taken note of the report of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India dated 20.11.2019 which provides that "Since phytosanitary risk is involved the sample is rejected and further consignment may be destructed or deported", in respect of the samples of the areca nuts that were taken from the seized trucks containing such areca nuts.
30. By taking note of the report of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India as regards the bio-security aspects of the areca nuts and also the stand of the Customs department that the areca nuts may have been smuggled in from across the Myanmar border in violation of the provisions of the Customs Act, we are of the view that if the proper officer or the empowered officer has reasons to so believe, it would be appropriate to initiate proceedings under Section 100/101 of the Customs Act and thereafter follow the procedures prescribed in the Act as regards search, arrest, seizure or confiscation. Without following the prescribed procedure of the Customs Act, it would be inappropriate for the police authorities of Assam to continue with the detention and the seizure of the trucks containing the areca nuts by taking the plea that provisions of the Customs Act had also been violated by the appellants.
31. We also cannot be oblivious to the aspect that the detained/seized areca nuts may result in a bio-security threat as provided in the report of the Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India. Therefore, we are of the view that it is for the appropriate authorities, particularly the authorities under the Customs Department to take a call on the matter as to what further is required to be done in respect of the detained/seized areca nuts, but such call has to be by strictly following the provisions of the Customs Act.