COMMON ORDER

Today, these cases were listed under the caption, “For Maintainability”.

2. These petitions have been filed for the second time to quash the proceedings intiated for the offences under Setion 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. The allegations against the petitioners is that they are exporting red sander pieces/logs in violation the Customs Act, 1962.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitions are maintainable since the previous quash petitions filed before this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.6886, 6890 & 6894 of 2018 were dismissed on 19.04.2022 without proper appreciation of the ground of merits. Therefore, the second quash petitions are maintainable and he also placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Superintendent and Remembrance of Legal Affairs, West Bengal vs. Mohan Singh & Others reported in CDJ 1974 SC 133. Hence, these second quash petitions are maintainable.

4. At the outset, I am not agreeing with the learend counsel, admittedly, the grounds raised in these petitions are also raised in the previous quash petitions. The main ground on which quashment is sought for that in a departmental proceedings charges were exonerated and the petitioners were relieved from all the charges. Adjudicating authorities found that no charges made out against the petitioners.

Therefore, the criminal proceedings would not be maintainable.

5. The same set of grounds are raised in the earlier petitions, whereas, this Court in the earlier criminal original petitions in Crl.O.P.Nos.6886, 6890 & 6894 of 2018 dated 19.04.2022, the learned Judge held that what had been raised as grounds to quash the criminal complaint registered by the Customs Officials is to be considered only during the trial and not at this stage of considering to quash and exercising the discretion under Section 482 of Cr.P.C as per the reported ruling of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal.

6. Such view of the matter, grounds were already considered by the learned Judge. Though, there was no detailed discussion, the same grounds have been raised in these petitions. Therefore, this Court is of the view that once the Court had considered and have dismissed the quash petitions, the similar set off grounds raised to quash for second time is not maintainable. On careful reading of the judgment cited by the learned counsel, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the facts and circumstances operating at the time of the subsequent application for quashing the previous and earlier quash petitons was clearly different from each other. In the said circumstances, the second quash petition was entertained. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that similar set off grounds raised to quash for the second time is not maintainable. However, it is left open to the petitioners to challenge the earlier Order of this Court by way of an appeal.

7. In view of the above observation, these Criminal Original petitions stands dismissed at SR stage itself. No costs.

13.07.2022 dhk Index : Yes Internet : Yes Speaking Order N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

dhk To

1.The Deputy Commissioner of Customs Prosecution Unit (Sea)

Seaport (Exports)

Customs House Chennai – 600 001

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

Crl.O.P.SR.No.24178, 24185 & 24188 of 2022

13.07.2022