R.Krishnamoorthy v. The Deputy Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.01.2023 CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR and W.M.P.No.23 of 2023 in Shri. R. Krishnamoorthy No.69, Karumarampalayam Uthukuli Main Road Tirupur - 641 607.
.. Petitioner Vs.
1.
The Deputy Director Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Coimbatore Zonal Unit 1103, Trichy Road Coimbatore - 641 018.
2.
Commissioner of Customs (Import) Group VB, NS-V Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, Tal-Uran NhavaSheva, Raigad, Navi Mumbai - 400 707.
.. Respondents Page Nos.1/10
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order bearing No.09/PR/DS/2021 in F.No.S/26-Misc1191/2021-22/Grp.5B JNCH dated 29.12.2021 of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the 2nd respondent to release the vehicle bearing registration No.PB 36J 9799 without insisting for any security or deposit along with its original Registration Certificate. For Petitioner :
Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan For Respondents :
Mr.V.Sundareswaran Senior Panel Counsel for Customs *****
O R D E R
This order will now govern the captioned main writ petition and captioned 'Writ Miscellaneous Petition' ['WMP'] thereat.
2. Mr.Hari Radhakrishnan, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner and Mr.V.Sundareswaran, learned Senior Panel Counsel for Customs who accepted notice on behalf of both the respondents are before this Court.
3. Owing to the narrow compass on which the captioned matter turns, considering the facts and circumstances of the instant case and the Page Nos.2/10
trajectory the matter has taken in the Admission Board, main writ petition was taken up and heard out with the consent of learned counsel on both sides.
4. Short facts will suffice. Short facts shorn of granular particulars are that the fulcrum of the case is an Automobile i.e., 'Toyota Land Cruiser' [hereinafter 'said automobile' for the sake of convenience and clarity]; that according to Revenue, it was imported in the name of a privileged person / Foreign Diplomat availing duty benefits but it was found in possession of writ petitioner who is a non-privileged person; that the writ petitioner contends that he has nothing to do with the import or availment of benefits vide exemption notification No.3/57 dated 08.01.1957 as he is a bona fide purchaser having purchased the said automobile through one Mr.Nipun Miglani; that the said automobile was seized by 'Directorate of Revenue Intelligence' ['DRI']; that the writ petitioner filed an earlier writ petition namely, W.P.No.16139 of 2021 assailing the seizure of said automobile; that pending this earlier writ petition, on the recommendation of investigating agency i.e., DRI, the second respondent made an 'order dated Page Nos.3/10
29.12.2021 bearing reference No.09/PR/DS/2021 in F.No.S/26-Misc1191/2021-22/Grp.5B JNCH' [hereinafter 'impugned order' for the sake of convenience and clarity]; that the impugned order was made by the second respondent inter alia under Section 110A of 'the Customs Act, 1962' [hereinafter 'said Act' for the sake of brevity and convenience]; that vide the impugned order, second respondent had imposed certain conditions for provisional release of said automobile; that the writ petitioner has filed the captioned writ petition saying that he is aggrieved by some of the condition/s for release; that it is to be noted that in the impugned order, paragraph No.2 describes said automobile as 'Toyota Land Cruiser' whereas in paragraph No.
7, it describes said automobile as 'Range Rover', while former is a Japanese make car and the latter is manufactured in England; that adverting to seizure memo, learned counsel for writ petitioner submits that it is 'Toyota Land Cruiser' and paragraph No.7 appears to be an inadvertent error; that it is to be noted that the writ petitioner is not assailing all the conditions but it may not be necessary to go into those aspects in the light of the order this writ Court now proposes to make.
Page Nos.4/10
5. Learned counsel for writ petitioner reiterates that the provisional release is acceptable and only some of the conditions need to be modified. Learned Revenue counsel opposes this request for modification.
6. This Court makes it clear that it is not delving into this disputation or contestation and is not expressing any view or opinion on the merits of the matter in this order. The reason is, the writ petitioner has sent a detailed representation dated 11.10.2022 (addressed to second respondent) requesting for modifications qua conditions for release adumbrated in the impugned order and it will suffice if the second respondent is directed to consider this 11.10.2022 request on its own merits and in accordance with law, take a call and make orders as expeditiously as the official business of the second respondent would permit and in any event, within one week from today i.e., by 11.01.2023. The decision of the second respondent shall be communicated to the writ petitioner under due acknowledgment in a acceptable mode within two working days from the date of disposal.
7. Before dropping the curtains on the captioned matter, this Court deems it appropriate to scan and reproduce the aforementioned 11.10.2022 Page Nos.5/10
request for modification for the sake of convenience [Page Nos.115 to 117]. A scanned reproduction of the same is as follows: Page Nos.6/10
Page Nos.7/10
Page Nos.8/10
8. Captioned Writ Petition disposed of with the aforementioned directives. Consequently, Writ Miscellaneous Petition thereat is disposed of as closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 04.01.2023 (2/2) Index: Yes/No Speaking / Non-speaking order mk To 1.
The Deputy Director Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Coimbatore Zonal Unit 1103, Trichy Road Coimbatore - 641 018.
2.
Commissioner of Customs (Import) Group VB, NS-V Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House, Tal-Uran NhavaSheva, Raigad, Navi Mumbai - 400 707.
Page Nos.9/10
M.SUNDAR, J., mk and W.M.P.No.23 of 2023 in 04.01.2023 (2/2) Page Nos.10/10