TVC Skyshop Limited and Vinod Aggarwal vs Union of India (UOI)

Ravindra Singh, J.—Heard Sri Manish Tiwari and Sri Sanjeev Sahay learned Counsel for the applicants and Sri Manoj Kumar learned Counsel for the opposite party.

This application has been filed by the applicants M/s TVC Skyshop Limited and Vinod Aggarwal with a prayer to quash the summons issued by the opposite party on 28.4.2006 and 8.5.2006 in pursuance of the Enquiry No. IV-CS(9) CP 25/06 in exercise of the powers conferred u/s 482 Cr.P.C. to this Court. The impugned summons have been issued by the Superintendent, Central Excise CPU (HQRS) Thane-II, u/s 14 of the Central Excise Act 1944/Section 108 of the Custom Act 1962 in respect of the inquiry pending against the applicants. The inherent powers of the High Court are preserved by the Section 482 Cr. P.C., but such powers can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any court. ''Process1 is a general word, meaning in effect, anything done by the Court. In the present case no process has been issued by any court, but in pursuance of the inquiry pending against the applicants, the summons have been issued u/s 14 of the Central Excise Act 1944/Section 108 of the Custom Act 1962, though, such enquiry deemed to be a ''judicial proceedings'' within the meaning of Section 193 and 228 I.P.C. as provided by Sub-section 3 of the Section 14 of the Central Excise Act 1944, but the inherent powers u/s 482 Cr. P.C. cannot be exercised to interfere in any investigation or inquiry pending, therefore, this application is not maintainable. It is open to the applicants to file a writ petition under Articles 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India or to avail any 0 other legal remedy.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.