By TIOL News Service

NEW DELHI, AUG 25, 2015: THE petitioner is before the High Court and seeks quashing of the FIR filed by the department under Sections 9/9AA of the CEA, 1944 on the ground that the demand of duty has been set aside by the CESTAT and so the continuance of proceedings arising out of the complaint in question is an exercise in futility.

It is further submitted that they have appeared before the trial court and pre-charge evidence is in progress and the next date of hearing is 2nd December 2015.

Reliance was placed inter alia upon the decisions in Anil Mahajan & Anr. 2008-TIOL-139-HC-DEL-CUS and Radhey shyam Kejriwal v. State of West Bengal & Anr.[2011] 4 S.C.R. 889 .

The High Court observed that since the petitioners have an alternate and efficacious remedy to seek discharge from trial court by urging the pleas now taken, the Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Applying the dictum of the Apex Court in Padal Venkata Rama Reddy (2011) 12 SCC 437), the petition was disposed of with liberty to petitioners to urge the pleas taken herein before the trial court.

The petition and the applications were accordingly disposed of.

In passing: Withdrawal of Prosecution by department - see Board Circular 998/5/2015-CX . dated 28.02.2015.

(See 2015-TIOL-1946-HC-DEL-CX)