JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Atul Mehra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and examined the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicants for quashing the charge-sheet dated 26.05.1995, order dated 17.1.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Allahabad by which the learned court below rejected the discharge application moved by the applicants in Criminal Case No.294 of 2004 registered under Sections 41/411 I.P.C. at Police Station Daraganj, District Allahabad and the revisional order dated 07.10.2008 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court, by which the revision was dismissed on the ground that against the interlocutory order revision is not maintainable.

3. The brief facts of the case are that on 02.06.1994, the police had intercepted the applicants' Maruti Car No. U.P.-82A-0144 at Shastri Bridge Chungi at Allahabad and after the search, 151 kg. of Silver, 4.5 kg. silver ornaments and Rs.2,73,000/- cash were recovered from the possession of the applicants. On the very same day i.e. on 02.06.1994, an FIR has been lodged at P.S. Daraganj, District Allahabad under Sections 41/411 I.P.C. and applicants were arrested.

4. During the investigation, the statements of nine persons have been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and except one Trade Tax Officer all the remaining witnesses were the Police personnels and the charge-sheet was filed against the applicants under Section 41/411 I.P.C.

5. From the perusal of the statement of Trade Tax Officer, it has come out that after lodging of the FIR, the matter has been referred to the Trade Tax Department for initiation of proceedings under the provisions of U.P. Trade Tax Act.

6. The applicants moved a bail application before the Sessions Court and there the applicants had stated that the goods in question belonged to M/s Sarvshri Chardeva Abhushan Bhandar, Buxar (Bihar) and the silver and cash seized were entered in the books of account of the firm and the said documents were filed with the bail application. Learned trial court had released the car and the cash in favour of the applicants.

7. On the intimation by the police to the Trade Tax Department, a notice dated 02.06.1994 was issued by the Sales Tax Officer, Allahabad.

8. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants are not liable to pay any tax on goods seized by the police under the Trade Tax Act for the reason, the applicants are not the importer as per the definition of importer provided under Section 2E of the U.P. Trade Tax Act and contesting the matter before the authorities.

9. Reliance has been placed upon Section 15A(1)(o) and Section 28-A of U.P. Trade Tax Act to show that the goods seized do not fall within the purview of above-noted provisions.

10. Learned counsel for the applicants has further contended that Sales/Trade Tax Revision No.597 of 2002 was preferred before this Court, under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act against the order of the Tribunal dated 26.08.2002, by which the Tribunal has confirmed the penalty imposed on the assessee/applicants for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- under Section 15A(1)(o) and the said revision was allowed by this Court by setting aside the order of the Tribunal vide it order dated 09.08.2010. It will be useful to quote the relevant part of the order absolving the applicants from imposition of any penalty under the Act. It reads as follows:-

“The present revision has been filed by the assessee under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax against an order of the Tribunal dated 26.08.02, by which the Tribunal has confirmed the penalty imposed on the assessee for a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- under Section 15A(1)(o).

The facts of the case are that the goods of the assessee were seized at Allahabd. He was carrying his goods from Agra to Indore. After the seizure was made, a penalty was also imposed on the assessee under Section 15A(1)(o).

It is the contention of the