PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS versus R. RAJU & ANR. ETC.

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, MADRAS versus R. RAJU & ANR. ETC.

Section 40(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is not confined to government servants and applies to any person prosecuted for acts or omissions under the Act, including violations. The limitation period set by section 40(2) bars prosecution initiated after six months from the date of the alleged offence. The High Court was correct in acquitting the respondents as prosecution was time-barred.

Parties
Appellant: Public Prosecutor, Madras; Respondent: R. Raju; Respondent: Another (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 August 1972
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From Madras High Court Judgment Dismissing State Appeals Against Acquittals in Two Cases
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Limitation of Prosecution, Interpretation of Excise Statutes, Scope of Statutory Protection
Criminal Law Tax/excise Law Limitation of Prosecution Interpretation of Excise Statutes Scope of Statutory Protection

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor, Madras

Appellant

R. Raju

Respondent

Another (unnamed)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal by Special Leave From Madras High Court Judgment Dismissing State Appeals Against Acquittals in Two Cases

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 40(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 applies only to government servants or to all persons
  2. 2 Whether limitation under section 40(2) bars prosecution for acts committed in violation of the Act
  3. 3 Whether acts committed maliciously or in bad faith are excluded from the scope of section 40(2)

Ratio Decidendi

Section 40(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 is not confined to government servants and applies to any person prosecuted for acts or omissions under the Act, including violations. The limitation period set by section 40(2) bars prosecution initiated after six months from the date of the alleged offence. The High Court was correct in acquitting the respondents as prosecution was time-barred.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Respondents acquitted
  • Prosecution held barred by limitation under section 40(2) of Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944