| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLG 1641 2001 SLD 1641 2001 PCRLJ 38 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 7255 of 1998, decision dated: 5-04-2000
JAWAD S. KHAWAJA, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Writ Petition No. 7255 of 1998, decision dated: 5-04-2000
JAWAD S. KHAWAJA, J
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Messrs ADAM SUGAR MILLS LTD., CHISHTIAN
VS
COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS HOUSE, MULTAN and 5 others
Law: Central Excise Act, (I of 1944)
Section: 13
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 4(i)(s)
(a) Central Excises Act (I of 1944)--- ----S. 13---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S4(i)(s)---Notifying the office of Excise functionaries as police station under S.4(i)(s), Cr.P.C.--Necessity---Office of Excise functionary acting under the provisions of Central Excises Act, 1944 was neither required to be notified as police station under S.13 of Central Excises Act, 1944, nor any other office of the Excise' Department was to be so notified under SA(i)(s), Cr.P.C. Muhammad Nawaz v. The State PLD 1999 Lah. 18 ref. (b) Central Excises Act (I of 1944)--S. 13---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Quashing of F.I.R.---F.I.R. was registered against the petitioner in exercise of powers conferred on Central Excise Officer under S.13 of Central Excises Act, 1944---Contention by the petitioner was that proceedings were initiated without adhering to the requirements of S.13 of Central Excises Act, 1944---Validity---Authorities having not proceeded. in the matter strictly in accordance with law, High Court directed the Authorities to proceed strictly in accordance with the provisions set out in S.13 of Central Excises Act, 1944---If the petitioner had any grievance against the procedure adopted by the Authorities, he would be entitled to invoke any available remedy under law---Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly. Muhammad Nawaz v. The State PLD 1999 Lah. 18 and The State v. Muhammad Yousuf PLD 1965 Lah. 324 ref. ORDER The main contention in the present petition urged by the learned counsel representing the petitioner, is that the document purporting to be an F. I. R., under section 161 of the Customs Act bearing F.I.R. No. 14 of 1998, dated 27-3-1998 has no legal sanctity. He has firstly contended that there is no concept of an F.I.R., under the Central Excises Act, 1944. Secondly, he has argued that even the purported F.I.R. has been made under section 161 of the Customs Act, 1969 by an Intelligence Officer Customs Intelligence. On this basis he has argued that said document has no efficacy in offences under the Central. Excises Act because officer of the Customs can only proceed under the Customs Act and not under the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492