KULDIP SINGH, J. - (1.) By this single judgment I shall dispose of CRM -M 24662 of 2011 and CRM -M 8949 of 2014. Facts of the case are extracted from CRM - M 24662 of 2011.
(2.) Petitioners have sought quashing of criminal complaint filed under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 (in short, 'the Act') pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar along with the summoning order dated 13.12.2010. Facts of the case are that a complaint No.120 -2 -2010 dated 13.12.2010 (original complaint No.6/2.2.2003 at Amritsar) has been filed under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 for evasion of customs duty amounting to Rs.1.85 crores by fraudulent means. It is stated that an intelligence input was received that M/s Megna Impex, 7 Sehdev Market, Jalandhar are engaged in fraudulent availment of benefit under Duty Entitlement Pass Book (in short, 'DEPB') scheme by forging the export documents. Investigation was initiated in December 2000 and during the course of investigation it was found that M/s Megna Impex have exported the goods under DEPB Scheme from CFS, Ludhiana. It was also found that said firm is a proprietorship concern in the name of Satbir Singh. The investigation in the matter further indicated that Gurkirpal Singh, Ashok Kumar, Pavitar Singh, Vijay Madan and Satbir Singh floated this concern in the name of Satbir Singh who was working as a Assistant of Pavitar Singh on monthly salary of Rs.6000/ -. Accordingly raid was conducted on the business premises of Gurkirpal Singh, Ashok Kumar and Pavitar Singh on 13/14.12.2000 by the officers of Anti Smuggling Wing of Customs Commissionerate Amritsar. Statement of Satbir Singh under Section 108 of the Act was recorded on 13.12.2000 in which he denied that he had ever purchased or exported anything in the name of M/s Megna Impex. He deposed that it was Gurkirpal Singh who purchased and exported goods in his name and that Ashok Kumar also connived with Gurkirpal Singh in this act. It was further disclosed that M/s Megna Impex was financed and exported by Ashok Kumar and Gurkirpal Singh and that Pavitar Singh was engaged in the activity of getting IEC number and other export related work and that Bank Account number of M/s Megna Impex was 681 in OBC Garha Road, Jalandhar and there was other account in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Jalandhar. He further stated that Gurkirpal Singh and Ashok Kumar might have signed the export related documents. They also might have signed by putting initials of Satbir Singh on some applications. Some applications were signed by him and these were personally submitted by him in the office of JDGFT Ludhiana. Ashok Kumar and Gurkirpal Singh made Satbir Singh to sign blank cheque books of the OBC, Jalandhar and State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur, Jalandhar. He further disclosed that he had visited Dubai in June 2000 and carried US $ 25000 along with him and gave this money to Ashok Kumar who received him at Dubai Airport. It was further stated that Ashok Kumar used to fill in the columns of the BRCs after getting it signed by him in blank. He further disclosed that all the DEPBs were obtained from JDGFT, Ludhiana by Ashok Kumar and Gurkirpal Singh from his office. The invoice numbers were also disclosed. He further disclosed that some of the DEPBs bear his signatures and other DEPBs are forged by Ashok Kumar. Statement of Pavitar Singh was also recorded. Statement of other accused were also recorded and ultimately, it was established that Ashok Kumar, Pavitar Singh, Satbir Singh, Vijay Madan and Gurkirpal Singh have violated the provisions of Sections 132 and 135 of the Act and that they have also submitted forged/ false export documents by way of substitution and forgery of BRCs for fraudulently obtaining the DEPB licence amounting to Rs.1.85 crore. Hence, the complaint.
(3.) The complaint was initially filed before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar. Vide order dated 19.10.2009 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar returned the complaint to the complainant stating that it has got no jurisdiction. Therefore, the complaint should be presented before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar or Ludhiana but after giving notice to the accused for 5.11.2009. It comes out that subsequently, after about one year, the complaint was re -filed before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, in which, the following impugned summoning order was passed: - "Present: Complainant with counsel. Complaint presented today. Earlier, it was returned for transfer before this Court by learned Court of CJM, Amritsar. So, it be checked and registered. Earlier, accused were appearing in the said court for the offence punishable u/s 132 and 135 of the Custom Act 1962. So, as per previous order, accused are ordered to be summoned for 4.3.2011." I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also carefully gone through the file. The allegation against the petitioner Pavitar Singh is that he was Accountant and that Satbir Singh was his employee and that a fake firm was floated in the name of his employee Satbir Singh and that he was involved in preparation of the forged DEPB which is transferable and can be used for setting off against the custom duty. ;