11 November 1998
Supreme Court
Download

HARBANS LAL Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

Bench: G.T. NANAVATI,S. RAJENDRA BABU.
Case number: Appeal Criminal 153 of 1980


1

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 1  

PETITIONER: HARBANS LAL

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       11/11/1998

BENCH: G.T. NANAVATI, S. RAJENDRA BABU.

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T Nanavati, J. A Criminal proceeding has been initiated against the appellant pursuant to the  complaint  filed  by  the  Deputy Collector of  Customs  and  Central Excise, Chandigarh.  The appellant approached the Punjab and Haryana High  Court  for getting the  same quashed.  As his contention that the court at Ambala has no jurisdiction  to  try  that  criminal  case filed against him was not accepted by the High Court and his application  came  to  be dismissed, the appellant has filed this appeal. The  contention of the appellant is that the alleged offence as stated in  the  complaint  took  place  somewhere between  Rohtak and Delhi and therefore the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Ambala, can have no Jurisdiction to try that offence.  Having gone through the  complaint,  we  find that  the  main  allegation  against the appellant and other accused is that in pursuance of the conspiracy between  them gold  was  transported  from  Pakistan  to  the  place  near Bahadurgarh in Haryana.  It is further stated  therein  that the  goods  had  passed through Amritsar, Rohtak and then to Bahadurharh.  Prima-facie, it appears  that  the  goods  had passed through  Ambala  also.   Therefore, Ambala court will have jurisdiction to try the offence as carrying of smuggled goods is also an offence.  The High  Court  was,  therefore, right  in  dismissing  the Criminal Misalliances Application filed by the appellant. However, it will be open to the  appellant  to  move the  appropriate  forum  for  transfer  of the case from the court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Ambala  is  likely  to cause any undue inconvenience or prejudice to the appellant. If such an application is made, obviously it will have to be decided on its own merits. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.