YAMAL MANOJBHAI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

YAMAL MANOJBHAI versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS

There is a divergence of opinion: Hon'ble Krishna Murari J. held that where goods specified under Section 123 are seized within the customs area (e.g., found on person crossing the green channel) Section 123 cannot apply and the accused is entitled to seek settlement under Section 127B, approving the Bombay High Court decision in Suresh Raheja; Hon'ble Sanjay Karol J. held that the proviso to Section 127B(1) expressly bars settlement in respect of goods enumerated under Section 123 and therefore settlement is not available; due to this divergence the matter is to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.

Parties
Petitioner: Yamal Manojbhai; Respondent: Union of India & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (crl.) No.55 of 2023 / Disposed
Outcome
Writ petition disposed of; divergence in bench on availability of settlement led to matter being placed before the Chief Justice of India
Legal Topics
Settlement Commission, Section 123 Customs Act, Section 127 B Customs Act, Article 21, Article 32
Customs Constitutional Law Criminal Law Settlement Commission Section 123 Customs Act Section 127 B Customs Act Article 21 Article 32

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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yamal Manojbhai

Petitioner

Union of India & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (crl.) No.55 of 2023 / Disposed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a settlement remedy under Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962, is available for goods specified under Section 123 of the Act
  2. 2 Whether invocation of Article 32 was maintainable in the facts of this petition

Ratio Decidendi

There is a divergence of opinion: Hon'ble Krishna Murari J. held that where goods specified under Section 123 are seized within the customs area (e.g., found on person crossing the green channel) Section 123 cannot apply and the accused is entitled to seek settlement under Section 127B, approving the Bombay High Court decision in Suresh Raheja; Hon'ble Sanjay Karol J. held that the proviso to Section 127B(1) expressly bars settlement in respect of goods enumerated under Section 123 and therefore settlement is not available; due to this divergence the matter is to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders.

Court Disposition

Writ petition disposed of; divergence in bench on availability of settlement led to matter being placed before the Chief Justice of India

Orders

  • Writ petition and interlocutory applications disposed of
  • Matter to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders due to divergence in opinions of the bench