Assistant Collector of Central Excise and anr. Vs. Abdul Wahab and anr.

Assistant Collector of Central Excise and anr. vs Abdul Wahab and anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jun 21, 1984

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/784749

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/784749
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: K.M. Natarajan, J.
Decided On: Jun 21, 1984
Case Number: Criminal Appeal Nos. 463/77 and 837/79
Subject: Excise

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Excise
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 377(2)

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Assistant Collector of Central Excise and anr.

Advocate P. Rajamanickam, Public Prosecutor for Customs

Respondent

Abdul Wahab and anr.

Advocate P. Rajaraman and ;Abdul Ghani, Advs.

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 377(2)
Cases Referred: Assistant Collector of Central Excise (Preventive) Madras v. V. Krishnamurthy
Reported In: 1986(24)ELT28(Mad)

Excerpt

- 1. both the appeals have been filed by the assistant collector of central excise, vellore and assistant collector of customs, madras-1 for enhancement of sentence under section 377(2) criminal procedure code. 2. the main question involved in both the appeals is about the maintainability of the appeals. my attention was drawn to the decision of a bench of this court in assistant collector of central excise (preventive) madras v. v. krishnamurthy (1) wherein natarajan, j. and ratnavel pandian, j. have held that an appeal preferred by the assistant collector of central excise under section 377(2). crl.p.c. through his counsel, on the ground of inadequacy of sentence awarded, is not competent, and is liable to be dismissed for that reason. in view of the bench judgment, these two appeals have to be dismissed on the ground that the assistant collector of central excise is not competent to file the appeals for enhancement of sentence under section 377(2), crl.p. c. hence dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. Both the appeals have been filed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Vellore and Assistant Collector of Customs, Madras-1 for enhancement of sentence under Section 377(2) Criminal Procedure Code.

2. The main question involved in both the appeals is about the maintainability of the appeals. My attention was drawn to the decision of a Bench of this Court in Assistant Collector of Central Excise (Preventive) Madras v. V. Krishnamurthy (1) wherein Natarajan, J. and Ratnavel Pandian, J. have held that an appeal preferred by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise under Section 377(2). Crl.P.C. through his counsel, on the ground of inadequacy of sentence awarded, is not competent, and is liable to be dismissed for that reason. In view of the Bench judgment, these two appeals have to be dismissed on the ground that the Assistant Collector of Central Excise is not competent to file the appeals for enhancement of sentence under Section 377(2), Crl.P. C. Hence dismissed.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 1984 Same Parties Assistant Collector of Central Excise and anr. vs Abdul Wahab... Same Subject Excise Same Judge K.M. Natarajan, J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 377(2)

Excise