J.P. SHARMA versus VINOD KUMAR JAIN

Citation: [1986] 2 S.C.R. 388 · Decided: 08-04-1986 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R.S. PATHAK
Cited by 1 judgment(s) · cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
388 
J.P. SHARMA 
Vo 
VINOD KlllAR JAIN 
APRIL 8, 1986 
[R. S. PATHAK AND SABYASACHI MUKHARJl, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 : 
Section 482 -
Q.iashing of Complaint - Jurisdiction of 
High Court to quash - Facts subsequently found out to prove 
truth or otherwise of allegation in complaint - Not a ground 
~-
C 
for quashing. 
On 13th May, 1981 M/s. Aurn Kumar & Co. applied for ,k 
import of 
'diamonds unset ~ 
uncut' for the purpose of + 
re-export of cut and polished diamonds. On 2nd June, 1981, 
there was an alleged oral agreement entered into between Jain 
D 
Shudh Vanaspati Ltd. and Alugul and Jain Shudh Vanaspati Ltd. 
made an application for opening Letter of Credit. On 5th June, 
1981 import of beef tallow was canalised through State Trading 
Corporation. On 6th June, 1981 there was a written confirma-
tion from Alugul of their contract with Jain Shudh Vanaspati 
w. 
~ 
E 
F 
G 
H 
On 8th June, 1981, the Banlt refused to open Letter of 
Credit as 
beef 
tallow import was 
allowed only 
through 
canalised agency. On 26th June, 1981 Alugul was established in 
Singapore. On June 29, 1981, Joint Controller of Imports and -t--
Exports, Bombay issued imprest licence to M/ s. Arun Kumar and 
· 
Co. for the import of 'diamonds unset and uncut' with 
the 
condition of re-export of cut and polished diamonds within a f 
period of six months from the date of first consignment. After 
the export of cut and polished diamonds was made, this licence 
could be utilised for import of OGL items within 12 months and 
further extenaion of 6 months, if granted. 
Shri V.K. Jain, Managing Director of M/s. J.S. v.L. 
obtained a letter of authority from Arun Kumar for the full 
face value of imprest import licence on 9th March, 1982 for 't 
the import of OGL items. An application was made to the Joint 
au.et Controller of Imports and Exports for the endorsement of 
OGL 
items as per paragraph 185(3) of the Import Policy of 
1982-83 on August 2, 1982. The licence was revalidated for 6 
...
J.P. SHARMA v. V.K. JAIN 
389 
·-+DX>nths on 10th September, 1982. On 20th September, 1982 an 
A 
additional slip was attached to import licence for import of 
OGL items. On this date no import of beef tallow was permitted 
under OGL except through canalised agency STC. 
In a writ petition filed by J,S, V.L. for directing the 
New Bank of India that it might open Letter of Credit, the 
B 
High Court of Delhi passed an order on 16th March, 1983 that 
>the Bank may open the Letter of Credit. 
Accused No. 2 to 9, Directors of J.S.V.L., were alleged 
-
to have entered into a conspiracy to contravene the provisions 
of s.5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 by 
Jparticipating in the Board's Meetings of M/s. J.s.v.L. on 28th 
c 
~rch, 1983 
and 
30th 
June, 
1983 
for 
illegally 
and 
~unauthorisedly importing beef tallow. By a resolution dated 
28th March, 1983 of the Board, the Board resolved pursuant to 
the order of the Delhi High Court that the New Bank of India 
be requested to issue irrevocable letter of credit in favour 
of M/s. Alugul Pvt. Ltd. Singapore duly supported by a Letter 
D 
of Guarantee given by the Punjab National Bank. 
On 30th June, 1983 New Bank of India opened .Letter of 
icredit. On 18th April, 1983, relevant invoice for the sale of 
beef tallow by M/s. Alugul to J.s.v.L. was issued. 
• 
It was alleged that the accused persons in criminal 
conspiracy with each other and also with other persons, 
E 
-+illegally and unauthorisedly imported beef tallow of the total 
value of the licence. On 3rd May, 1983, show-cause notice 
under s.124 of the Customs Act, 1962 was issued and on 24th 
~Y, 1983 the Collector of CustOllS passed orders confiscating 
F 
~ 
consignment for home conslllllption. 
A complaint was filed by the appellant, Deputy Chief 
Controller of Imports and Exports, in the Chief Metropolitan 
Magistrate's Court, Delhi for offences under s. 120B of the 
Indian Penal Code read with s. 5 of the Imports and Exports 
G 
~Control) Act, 1947, against 12 accused persons named in the 
complaint. The Magistrate took cognizance and s11111110ned the 
accused persons. 
The accused persons filed petitions under s. 482 of the 
Criminal Procedure Code in the High Court for quashing the 
H 
complaint, which were allowed. 
390 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1986) 2 s.c.R. 
A 
On the question whether the High Court under s. 482 '+--
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
Criminal Procedure 
Code 
was 
justified for quashing the 
complaint:
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.