Introduction:

The Calcutta High Court recently quashed a complaint against a director of a private company involved in liquor import, citing a failure to implicate the company in the prosecution. The court highlighted a violation of Section 46B of the Bengal Excise Act, 1909, which pertains to offenses by companies. The petitioner, a retired Army Officer and director of Duomo Distribution Private Limited, faced accusations related to the seizure of foreign liquor bottles. The court’s decision centered on the absence of the company as an accused and adherence to legal provisions.

Arguments of Both Sides:

The petitioner’s defense argued that the complaint was in violation of Section 46B, emphasizing that the company had not been made an accused. They pointed to the specific provisions governing offenses by companies and the necessity of implicating the company. The prosecution contended that the petitioner, being a director, could be held responsible, irrespective of the company’s involvement. The defense further raised concerns about biased investigation practices and disputed the applicability of excise duties in the absence of a retail price.

Court’s Judgment:

The Calcutta High Court quashed the complaint, ruling in favor of the petitioner. Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) highlighted the failure to make the company an accused, which was essential under Section 46B of the Bengal Excise Act. The court deemed the complaint in violation of legal provisions and emphasized the importance of adhering to the specific language of the law. It also acknowledged the petitioner’s assertion that the seized liquor was not meant for sale, supported by declarations from the importing company.