SUNIL GUPTA Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is a Central Excise Officer debarred from arresting a person without a warrant despite the fact that he has reasons to believe that the person is liable to be punished under the Central Excise Act, 1944 This is the short question that arises for consideration in these two writ petitions. Learned counsel for the parties have referred to the facts in CWP No. 1647 of 1999. These may be briefly noticed.

(2.) The petitioner is the Managing Director of M/s GCUL Limited. This company has its registered office in village Khandsa, District Gurgaon. It is engaged in the manufacture and export of terry towels. The petitioner claims that "the company is a 100% Export Oriented Unit." It is "exempted from paying the Central Excise Duty on the terry-towels being manufactured and exported......."

(3.) Till July 1996, Mr. S.K. Aggarwal was working as the General Manager of the Company. He was looking after the day to day affairs and was "the authorised signatory as far as the Central Excise Act, 1944... is concerned." He worked as General Manager till July 1996. After that, Mr. Sandeep Aggarwal was authorised by a resolution dated July 12, 1966. A copy of the resolution has been produced as Annexure P.1 with the writ petition. The petitioner alleges that the copy of the resolution was "duly communicated to the persons concerned in the respondent-department for their information, record and necessary action at their end." He was "in no way connected with the day to day functioning of the company and basically was only looking after the marketing operations..... and usually remains abroad for about six months in a year for the purpose of securing orders and also ensuring the payments for the materials already supplied...." It has been averred that during the year 1997-98, the company had earned foreign exchange to the tune of Rs. 19 crores. During the current year till the filing of the petition, the company had earned about Rs. 31 crores in foreign exchange.