Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Adani Enterprises Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Criminal Writ Petition No. 3818 of 2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 17/10/20219
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Adani Enterprises Limited Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court)

Bombay High Court held that taking recourse to the provisions of Section 166A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for issuance of the Letter of Rogatory by the Magistrate without following procedure prescribed under section 155(2) cannot be sustained and deserved to be quashed.

Facts- A pivotal but significant issue which arise in the present Writ Petition is whether the Respondent – Directorate of Revenue Intelligence has legally and validly commenced the investigation against the petitioner into alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 and whether or not, based on the said investigation set into motion, it is entitled to take recourse to the provisions of Section 166-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for issuance of the Letter of Rogatory by the Magistrate.

Conclusion- Section 166A cannot be read in isolation and it will have to be read as a part of Chapter XII of the Code to be invoked and applied where the investigation is commenced either under Section 154 or 155 in the manner prescribed therein and it is necessarily an investigation under Chapter XII, which in case of a cognizable offence, commenced with lodging of an information with the police station officer and the police officer following the procedure set out in Section 154 and in case of a non-cognizable offence, by obtaining an order of the jurisdictional Magistrate in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 155, without obtaining such an order from the Magistrate under Section 155((2). The valid investigation cannot be said to be commenced and continued and therefore, recourse to section 166A without obtaining the necessary permission in respect of an investigation of a non-cognizable offence cannot be justified.

Held that Section 166A is not an independent island on which any investigating/inquiring authority can jump on without taking recourse to Section 154/155, we hold and declare that the action of the respondents in giving effect of the letter of Rogatory issued by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai in relation to the import of coal of Indonesian origin cannot be sustained and it deserves to be quashed and set aside.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031