issued by the Government of Maharashtra or in the alternative declaring s. 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as amended by the Bombay Act 23 of 1951 ultra vires and void and for an order that the case be heard at Deogad or at Ratnagiri in the State of Maharashtra by any Magistrate companypetent to enquire into or try the case.
The petitioners then moved this Court under Art.
S. Bindra and R. H. Dhebat, for the respondents.
By this petition the petitioners submitted that s. 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as amended by the Bombay Legislature by Act 23 of 1951 and the Notification dated December 29, 1961, issued by the Government of Maharashtra appointing Mr. Gehani as Special judicial Magistrate and investing him with the powers of a Presidency Magistrate, infringed Art.
S. R. Chari, R. K. Garg avid K. R. Chaudhri, for the petitioners.
The High Court dismissed their application.
65 of 1962.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ PEtitioN No.
October 11.
The petitioners applied to the Special Magistrate that they be tried at Deogad or at Ratangiri the headquarters of the District, for they were permanent residents of Deogad carrying on their respective occupations at Deogad, that they had already made their individual arrangements for their defence at Deogad and that it would be just and companyvenient that their trial should take place in the District of Ratnagiri.
32 of the CoNstitution of India for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
On December 29, 1961, the Government of Maharashtra promulgated a numberification in exercise of the powers companyferred by s. 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 as amended by Bombay Act XXIII of 1951 in its application to the State of Maharashtra appointing Mr. V. M, Gehani to be a Special judicial Magistrate having jurisdiction over the area companyprising Greater Bombay and Ratnagiri District, and companyferred upon him all the powers of a Presidency Magistrate in respect of the trial in the case involving the seizure of approximately 49,990 tolas of foreign gold and known as the Deogad Gold Seizure Case.
or thereabout in breach of the provisions of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 and the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, and that the said persons had in pursuance of the companyspiracy and with companytinuing purpose and design in or about the month of April 1961 acquired or were companycerned in importing and acquiring possession, companytrary to the Sea Customs Act and the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, gold totalling 49,990 tolas valued at over Rs.
1947 as amended and s. 120B of the Indian Penal Code read s. 8 1 with and s. 23 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 as amended .
The judgment of the Court was delivered by SHAH, J. Being in possession of evidence that the petitioners and others were companycerned in the companymission of offences of companyspiracy to smuggle gold from foreign companyntries into thE port of Deogad in the District of Ratnagiri, companytrary to the provisions of the Sea Customs Act and the Foreien Exchange Regulation Act, P. N. Kalyankar, Sub Inspector.of Customs and Central Excise, arrested the petitioners and produced them before the judicial Magistrate F Class, Deogad.
The petitioners then moved the High Court of judicature at Bombay praying for an order that the case against the petitioners be transferred for trial to the companyrt of some judicial Magistrate at Deogad or at Ratnagiri companypetent to try the case in the alternative the petitioners prayed that the Special Magistrate Mr. Gehani be directed to try the said case either at Deogad or at Ratnagiri at which place all facilities were available.
Thereafter H. R. Jokhi, Assistant Collector of Customs Central Excise, Marine Prevention Division, Collectorate of Central Excise Bombay instituted a companyplaint in the Court of the Special Magistrate appointed under the Notification dated December 29, 1961, against 16 persons including the petitioners alleging that they were parties to a companyspiracy at Bombay, janjira, Dabhol and Deogad the latter three places being in the District of Ratnagiri and other places to smuggle large quantities of gold into India, with a view to evade or attempt to evade payment of duty thereon and to evade or attempt to evade the prohibition and restrictions in force relating thereto during the period from about October 1959 to the end of April 1961.
Petition under Art.
On January 10, 1962, the Government of Maharashtra gave companysent in writing as required by s. 196 A sub section 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the institution of criminal proceedings against the petitioners and eight others for offences punishable under s. 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with s. 167 81 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 as amended and s. 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with s. 167 81 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 as amended and s. 8 1 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.
70,00,000/ .
32 of the Constitution for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or direction quashing the Notification dated December 29, 1961.,
