High Court of Rajasthan

Mohammed Aslam Vs. Union Of India

MANU/RH/0009/2021

01.02.2021

Criminal

Separate prosecution for offence under Customs Act for smuggling of gold and offence under Section 16 of UAPA maintainable

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 483 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) for quashing of FIR filed under Section 16 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) r/w Section 120B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner have placed on record that along with the petitioners, nine (9) other people are facing trial under the Customs Act for smuggling 18.569 kgs of gold before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic offences) and the second FIR on similar allegation is not maintainable. He further adds that the action taken by the NIA is discriminatory to the present petitioners. The petitioner is implicated on the suspicion that he had smuggled gold with intent to threaten the economic stability of the country u/s 15 (I)(a)(iiia) of Act, however, smuggling of gold is not covered in the term ‘any other material’. Therefore, the FIR is a glaring example of abuse of power.

The Court observed that offences under both the acts are very different and hence, separate prosecution is maintainable under the law. Therefore, prosecution based merely on the provisions of Customs Act is not violative of Article 20 of the Constitution of India and Section 300 of Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, the crime being of serious nature, bail cannot be granted. No case is made out and hence petition dismissed.

Tags : Bail Application Nature of offence

Share :