High Court Of Delhi
ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS - Appellant
Versus
TILAK RAJ - Respondent
Decided On : 02/14/1969
{'KEYWORD': 'Customs Act - Jurisdiction of Magistrate - Seizure of Car - Return of Car on Spurdari', 'SUBJECT': 'Jurisdiction of Magistrate to order the return of a car seized by Customs Officers under the Customs Act on spurdari.', 'ACT SECTION LIST': ['Section 523, Criminal Procedure Code', 'Section 110 and 115 of the Customs Act', 'Section 104(1) and (2), 124, 125, 322 of the Customs Act'], 'SUMMARY': 'The Magistrate has no jurisdiction under section 523, Criminal Procedure Code, to order the return of a car seized by Customs Officers under the Customs Act on spurdari, at least before the launching of criminal proceedings.'}
Fact of the Case:
Customs Preventive Staff seized a car and 13 bars of gold from Bal Kishan Khanna, believing they were imported without a permit and liable to confiscation. Tilak Raj, Bal Kishan's brother, applied for the return of the car on spurdari. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate allowed the application, but the Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the revision petition filed by the Assistant Collector Customs.
Finding of the Court:
The Magistrate had no jurisdiction to order the return of the car on spurdari to Tilak Raj respondent under the provisions of section 523, Criminal Procedure Code, as Customs Officers are not police officers within the meaning of that section.
Issues: Whether a Magistrate has jurisdiction under section 523, Criminal Procedure Code, to order the return of a car seized by Customs Officers under the Customs Act on spurdari.
Ratio Decidendi: The expression "police officer" used in section 523, Criminal Procedure Code, is to be construed strictly and is to include only police officers properly so called. Customs Officers are not police officers within the meaning of that expression as they do not have the power to submit a charge-sheet under section 173 of the Code, though they are invested with the powers of a police officer regarding arrest and search.
Final Decision: The revision petition is allowed. The order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate is set aside.
( 1 ) THE facts, out of which this revision petition against an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, has arisen are as follows :-
THE Customs Preventive Staff, New Delhi, had, on the 29th August, 1968 intercepted a car No. MHJ-1116, near Jamuna Bridge. Bal Kishan Khanna and other persons were travelling in that car. On the personal search of Bal Kishan Khanna, 13 bars of gold weighing 130 tolas with foreign markings were recovered. The Customs Preventive Staff believed that the 13 bars of gold had been imported into India without a permit as required under law and were liable to be confiscated and that the car was also liable to be confiscated. The Customs Preventive Staff, had therefore, taken the 13 bars of gold and the car into possession.
( 2 ) ON the 4th September, 1968, Tilak Raj respondent, brother of Bal Kishan Khanna, made an application, in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, praying that the car seized may be returned to him. The application was opposed on behalf of the Customs Preventive Department. It was pleaded that as the car was liable to be confiscated under section 115 (2) of the Customs Act, only Customs Officers had jurisdiction to take proceedings with respect to the car and that as no criminal proceedings had been launched in the Court with respect of the smuggling of the 13 bars of gold, the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to return the car. That application was dismissed on the 10th September, 1968, on the ground of non-prosecution as Tilak Raj respondent had failed to put in appearance. On the 13th September, 1968, Tilak Raj, respondent made another application for the return of the car on spurdari. That applica- tion was opposed by the Customs Preventive Department on the same grounds on which the earlier application had been opposed. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate allowed the application of Tilak Raj respondent and returned the car to him on spurdari. He held that as the application was for the return of the car on spurdari only, it did not debar the Customs Preventive Depart- ment to confiscate the car under the law.
( 3 ) THE Assistant Collector Customs went up in revision to the Court of Session against the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. The revision petition was heard and disposed of by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The learned Additional Sessions Judge held that the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate could not be sustained either under section 516 (A) or under section 517, Criminal Procedure Code, but could be sustained under section 523 of the Code. He, therefore, dismissed the revision petition.
( 4 ) THE Assistant Collector Customs has come up in revision to this Court. The finding of the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the car could not have been returned either under section 516 (A) or under section 517, Criminal Procedure Code, has not been challenged before me. The only point canvassed was whether the Magistrate had jurisdiction under section 523. Criminal Procedure Code, to order the return of the car on spurdari.
( 5 ) SECTION 523 aforesaid reads :-
(1) The seizure by any police officer of property taken under section 51, or alleged or suspected to have been stolen, or found under circumstances which create suspicion of the commission of any offence, shall be forthwith reported to a Magistrate, who shall make such order as he thinks fit respecting the disposal of such property or the delivery of such property to the person entitled to the possession thereof, or, if such person cannot be ascertained, respecting the custody and production of such property. (2) If the person so entitled is known, the Magistrate may order the property to be delivered to him on such conditions (if any) as the Magistrate thinks fit. If such person is unknown, the Magistrate may detain it and shall, in such case, issue a proclamation specifying the articles of which such property consists, and requiring any person who may have a claim theret
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.