JUDGMENT

Dr. AR . Lakshmanan, J. — Leave granted.

2. Heard Mr. Mohan Parasaran, learned Additional Solicitor General for the appellant-Union of India and Mr. Arun Jaitely, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1.

3. The appeal was filed by the Union of India through its Secretary, Ministry of Finance and the Director of Revenue Intelligence and two others questioning the correctness of the judgment passed by the High Court dated 14.10.2005. The High Court while allowing the writ petition filed by respondent no.1 held that the action of the appellants herein in preventing respondent no.1 from operating its account was bad in law and the appellants could not have issued any direction under section 110(3) read with section 113(i) and section 121 of the Customs Act, 1962. Consequently, the High Court has directed the second respondent Bank to release the account of respondent no.1 and permit operation thereof.

4. In this appeal, several grounds have been raised by the Union of India questioning the legality and correctness of the orders passed by the High Court. In view of the subsequent developments, we are not going into the questions of law raised and the merits in this appeal at