Page 130 - ELT_1st July 2020_Vol 373_Part 1

40 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

customs waters has been, is being or is about to be used in the smug-
gling of any goods or in the carriage of any goods which have been
smuggled, he may at any time stop any such vehicle, animal or vessel
or, in the case of an aircraft, compel it to land, and -
(a) rummage and search any part of the aircraft, vehicle or vessel;
(b) examine and search any goods in the aircraft, vehicle or vessel
or on the animal;
(c) break open the lock of any door or package for exercising the
powers conferred by clauses (a) and (b), if the keys are with-
held.
(2) Where for the purposes of sub-section(1) -
(a) it becomes necessary to stop any vessel or compel any aircraft
to land, it shall be lawful for any vessel or aircraft in the ser-
vice of the Government while flying her proper flag and au-
thority authorized in this behalf by the Central Government to
summon such vessel to stop or the aircraft to land, by means
of an international signal, code or other recognized means,
and thereupon such vessel shall forthwith stop or such aircraft
shall forthwith land; and it fails to do so, chase may be given
thereto by any vessel or aircraft as aforesaid and if after a gun
is fired as a signal the vessel fails to stop or the aircraft fails to
land, it may be fired upon;
(b) it becomes necessary to stop any vehicle or animal, the proper
officer may use all lawful means for stopping it, and where
such means fail, the vehicle or animal may be fired upon.”
20. It would not be out of place to mention another section of Customs
Act, 1962. Section 155 of the Customs Act reads as under :
“Protection of action taken under the Act
(1) No suit, prosecution or other legal proceedings shall lie against the
Central Government or any officer of the government or a local au-
thority for anything which is done, or intended to be done in good
faith, in pursuance of this act or the rules or regulations.
(2) No proceeding other than a suit shall be commenced against the Cen-
tral Government or any officer of the government or a local authority
for anything purporting to be done in pursuance of this Act without
giving the Central Government or such officer a month’s previous no-
tice in writing of the intended proceeding and of the cause thereof, or
after the expiration of three months from the accrual of such cause.”
21. Previously I have observed that the authencity of the documents
produced by the petitioners in support of their contention to quash the proceed-
ings has not been challenged by the State. As per the FIR alleged incident oc-
curred on 18-9-2010 on public road. It was alleged by the de facto complainant
that the vehicle was stopped by the accused and two of them opened the door of
the vehicle of the complainant and snatched away his bag containing Rs.
2,03,800/- (Rupees two lakh three thousand eight hundred). The Learned Advo-
cate appearing for the petitioners has laid stress on the fact that the alleged act of
the petitioners/the accused are connected with the discharge of their official du-
ties. It is settled principle of law that the accused persons are not debarred from
producing relevant documents which can be legally looked into without any
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st July 2020  130