DEPARTMENT OF CUSTOMS versus SHARAD GANDHI

Citation: [2019] 4 S.C.R. 273 · Decided: 27-02-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ASHOK BHUSHAN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
273
[2019]  4  S.C.R. 273
273
DEPARTMENT OF CUSTOMS
v.
SHARAD GANDHI
(Criminal Appeal No. 174 of  2019)
FEBRUARY 27, 2019
[ASHOK BHUSHAN AND K. M. JOSEPH, JJ.]
Customs Act, 1962: ss.132 and 135(1)(a) – Prosecution under,
in regard to the antiquities or art treasures – Held: Prosecution
under ss.132 and 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962, is not barred
in regard to the antiquities or art treasures – Antiquities and Art
Treasures Act, 1972.
Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972: s.30 – Whether the
words ‘any law in force’ must be construed ejusdem generis with
the two laws indicated in s.30 namely, the Ancient Monuments
Preservation Act, 1904 and the Ancient Monuments and
Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 – Held:  The 1904 Act
and the  1958 Act indicate  a one common genus – It is, inextricably
intertwined with the heritage and history of the nation – These two
enactments which are specifically embodied in s.30 are followed by
general words which allow the application of the principle of ejusdem
generis – For the said reason, the words “any other law for the time
being in force” are employed – The intention behind s.30 is to provide
for any other law which deal with antiquity to continue to have
force and declare its enforceability even after passing of the
Antiquities Act – The applicability of Customs Act through the
mechanism provided under s.30 would bring it into conflict with s.4
of the Act and this certainly would not be the legislative intention –
The words ‘any other law’ in s.30 would not include Customs Act –
Doctrines/Principles – Principle of ejusdem generis – Interpretation
of statutes  – Ancient Monuments Preservation Act, 1904  – Ancient
Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
Doctrines/Principles: Principle of  ejusdem generis –
Applicability of – Held: In order to apply the principle of ejusdem
generis, the court must find the existence of enumerated things before
general words – In other words, specified categories must have a
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
274
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019]  4  S.C.R.
common golden thread of commonality running through them –
Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 – s.30.
Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972: s.4 – Whether having
regard to the mandate of s.4 of the Antiquities Act, the prosecution
under ss.132/135 of the Customs Act for attempting to export
antiquity would be inconsistent with s.25 r/w s.26 of the Antiquities
Act – Held: By virtue of s.4 of Antiquities Act, all the provisions of
the Customs Act except to the extent of inconsistency is provided
full play – By virtue of the same, prosecution under ss.132 and 135
would lie provided that the ingredients of the offence contained in
ss.132 and 135 are found to exist – The authority competent to
sanction prosecution under the Customs Act is the exclusive authority
to countenance prosecution for offences under the Customs Act –
So, there can be no conflict if a prosecution under s.132 of the
Customs Act is maintained after proper sanction by the competent
authority under the Customs Act –  It would not in any way violate
either s.25 or s.26 of the Act  – When a person exports or attempt to
export an antiquity, it is but essential that he would be having a
transaction with relation to the customs – If in his transaction with
the customs in regard to export or attempted export of any antiquity
or art treasure he does any of the acts contained in s.132 of the
Customs Act, it cannot be said that he is being prosecuted for the
same offence as contained in s.3 r/w s.25 of the Antiquities Act –
The ingredients of s.25 of the Act and s.132 of the Customs Act are
distinct and different from one another – Constitution of India –
Art.254 – Customs Act, 1962 – ss.132 and 135 – Foreign Trade
(Development & Regulation) Act 1992 – ss.3 and 5.
Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972: Legislative intent of
enactment – Discussed.
Ancient Monument Preservation Act, 1904: Legislative intent
of enactment – Discussed.
Ancient Monument and Archeological Site and Remains Act,
1958:  Legislative intent of enactment – Discussed.
Constitution of India: Art.254 – Concept of Inconsistency –
Inconsistencies between laws made by Parliament and laws made
by legislatures of the State – Discussed – Antiquities and Art
Treasures Act, 1972.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
275
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 In order  to apply the principles of ejusdem
generis, the court must find the existence of enumerated things
bef

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.