Full Judgment Text
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Miscellaneous Application No. of 2023
@ Dy. No. 16203 of 2023
With
Interlocutory Application No. 79306, 79307 & 79308 of 2023
in
Criminal Appeal No. 463 of 2022
Vijay Kumar Ghai & Ors. ... APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
State of West Bengal & Ors. ... RESPONDENT(S)
------------
Amit Jalan … APPLICANT
JUDGMENT
KRISHNA MURARI, J.
The present Miscellaneous Application has been moved by the
applicant- Amit Jalan along with the application seeking permission to file
intervention.
1
2. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant. The applicant who is
not a party to the proceedings in Criminal Appeal No. 463 of 2022, which was
decided by this Court vide order dated 22.03.2022, is seeking clarification of
the said order solely on the ground that the same may have a bearing on the
case of the applicant.
3. From a perusal of pleadings, we find that three criminal prosecutions
were launched by the Revenue Department under Sections 132 and 135 of the
Customs Act, 1962, against the applicant which in turn were based upon three
adjudication proceedings initiated by the department.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that in all the three
adjudication proceedings, the issue has been decided finally in favour of the
applicant by CESTAT. Still the criminal proceedings are continuing and in the
light of the judgment dated 22.03.2022 passed by this Court in Criminal
Appeal No. 463 of 2022, is liable to be quashed and in the light of the law laid
down by this Court vide judgment dated 22.03.2022, the continuation of
criminal proceedings are nothing but an abuse of process of law.
2
5. A perusal of the pleadings go to show that the clarification is being
sought that the law laid down by the Court vide judgment dated 22.03.2022
rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 463 of 2022 ought not to be restricted to the
facts of the case but made applicable to all cases including those pending
against the applicant.
5. We have no hesitation in stating that the application is totally
misconceived. It goes without saying that the law declared by this Court is
binding on everybody but an authority/court seized with a particular case is
required to test the facts of that case in order to come to the conclusion that the
law declared by this Court is applicable to the facts of the case pending before
the said authority or Court.
6. We have no reason to doubt that the court/authority before whom the
proceedings are pending, shall adjudicate the same on its own merits and shall
follow the law declared by this Court, if the facts of the case so warrant.
7. In view of the above, the permission for intervention is refused and
accordingly, the intervention and the clarification application stands dismissed.
3
8. The Miscellaneous Application stand disposed of accordingly.
....................J.
…………………………
(KRISHNA MURARI)
………………………… ....................J
(AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH)
NEW DELHI;
APRIL 26, 2023
4