* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: 8^th May, 2025 Pronounced on: 14^th July, 2025 + CRL.M.C.984/2018 MANISH KUMAR JAIN S/o Late Shri A.K. Jain R/o J-120, Second Floor, Sector-41, Noida.

.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Priyadarshi Manish, Ms. Anjali Jha Manish, Mr. Paras Aneja & Mr.

Aman Ahluwalia, Advocates versus

1. STATE Through Standing Counsel Delhi High Court New Delhi.

2. SHRI NAVYUG TANEJA Senior Intelligence Officer Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, 7^th Floor, D Block, I.P. Bhawan, I.P. Estate, New Delhi.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Shoaib Haider, Additional Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.1-State Mr. Satish Aggarwala, Senior Standing Counsel for Respondent No.2 CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

J U D G M E N T

Signature Not Verified Signed By:ANIL CRL.M.C.984/2018 Page 1 of 14 NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

1. Petition under Section 482 Code of Civil Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C) has been filed seeking quashing of Criminal Complaint No.26460/2017 (now re-numbered as 6903/2018) under Section 174 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) and the Non-Bailable Warrants dated 22.01.2018 issued against the Petitioner, Manish Kumar Jain.

2. Briefly stated, the Petitioner, Manish Kumar Jain, Partner of M/s Mala Petrochemicals & Polymers was engaged in import and trading of different chemicals including PVC. He filed a Bill of Entry bearing No.8911267 dated 16.03.2017, for clearance of Ammonium Sulphate at the assessable value of Rs.67,50,658.20 and paid the requisite customs duty. However, the consignment was wrongly sent by the Supplier and the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) issued an alert against him. The search was conducted at his godown on 22.03.2017 and the goods were seized for not providing the import documents in respect of them.

3. During the investigations, the Petitioner appeared before DRI on 30.03.2017, 31.03.2017 and 10.04.2017 and his statements were recorded under Section 108 Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as “Customs Act”).

4. During the investigations, on the directions of DRI, Petitioner, Manish Kumar Jain deposited Rs.3 Crores against the past import. The Petitioner also deposited Rs.1,19,78,677/- in respect of the imported consignment against the Bill of Entry No.8911267 dated 16.03.2017. Because of the mistake of Supplier, some wrong description got mentioned on them, Signature Not Verified Signed By:ANIL CRL.M.C.984/2018 Page 2 of 14 leading to the goods being seized by DRI on 21.04.2017, even though the entire amount had been deposited.

5. Despite having deposited the duty and ‘No Objection’ of DRI, the goods had been provisionally released by Commissioner of Customs but on onerous conditions. Writ Petition W.P(C) No.3965/2017 was filed before this Court. On the first date of hearing, an Order dated 05.05.2017 for provisional release of goods with onerous conditions, was passed.

6. In the meanwhile, on 08.05.2017 the DRI recorded the statement of the Petitioner and he was assured that no further statements would be required.

7. The Petitioner filed second Petition W.P(C) No.4123/2017 in which Division Bench of this Court modified the conditions for provisional release, vide Order dated 19.05.2017.

8. After the Order of Division Bench, DRI issued summons under Section 108 Customs Act not only to the Petitioner but also to his son and brother-in-law, on different dates.

9. In the meanwhile, summons was issued on 22.07.2017 to the Petitioner. The summons were not served in accordance with Section 153 Customs Act, but was affixed at the door of his house, since he was out of town. He came to know about the same when he later returned back.

10. On account of non-compliance of this single summon dated 22.07.2017, first Criminal Complaint C.C.No.12477/2017 was filed by the DRI before the Ld. CMM under Section 174 IPC in which Summons were issued on 05.08.2017 . On coming to know about the pending proceedings, counsel for the petit