SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2017 Supreme(SC) 925

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, UDAY UMESH LALIT
CHANDPAKLAL RAMANLAL SHAH – Appellant
Versus
RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD. – Respondent


JUDGMENT

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against the Order dated 17th October, 2015 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Revision Application No.192 of 2014. Thereby, the High Court set aside the order of the trial court dated 22nd March, 2013 and discharged the respondent in Criminal Case No.441 of 1987 under Section 9 of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (the Act) read with Rules 52A, 56A, 173G, 9(2) and 173(Q) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (the Rules) read with Section 11-A of the Act.

2. Complaint dated 4th August, 1987 was filed by the appellant in his capacity as Superintendent, Central Excise, Group –II, Central Excise Collectorate, Hqrs. Jivabha Mension, Ahmedabad alleging commission of offence mentioned in the complaint. The trial Magistrate summoned the accused. On 20th May, 1994, Rule 56A was omitted by a notification. On that basis, the respondent filed an application for discharge. The application was rejected and charge was framed by the trial Magistrate vide order dated 22nd March, 2013 as follows :

“A charge is framed against the accused for the offence punishable under Section 9 of Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944 rea





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top