FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through DirectorGeneral of Intelligence and Investigation. FBR, Karachi vs MUHAMMAD JAMAL RIZVI and others

' GHULAM RABBANI, J.---Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 13-10-2010 whereby Constitution Petition bearing No, D-2280 of 2010 filed by respondent Muhammad Jamal Rizvi was allowed and the order of adjudicating authority was set aside.

2. Relevant facts are that on 6-4-2010 the Senior Intelligence Officer, respondent No, 2 herein, detained 1992 model vehicle Mitsubishi Pajero 2500CC bearing Registration No, BB-7271 (Original No .CC-21-50), Chasis No .440NJ00552, Engine No,EDEC-2271, inter alia, on the ground that it was a smuggled vehicle. Original documents of respondent No,8 Mudassir were also taken into possession, whereafter a notice under section 171 of Customs Act was issued to the respondent No,8. The Customs officials, thereafter removed the original Number Plates and affixed the official Number Plates bearing No, GP 8695 and started using the said vehicle unauthorisedly and unlawfully. This vehicle had been purchased by respondent No,1, Muhammad Jamal Rizvi, who filed the above noted Constitution Petition challenging the issuance of the notice under section 171 ibid vide letter dated 5-5-2010 which was allowed vide judgment impugned herein.

3. During the course of his arguments learned counsel submitted that the vehicle in question was rightly detained by the Customs Authorities for verification of its importation, payment of duty and taxes leviable thereon and subsequently sent to the AIG Police, Forensic Division Sindh, for chemical examination who confirmed that the chassis of vehicle was tampered meaning thereby that it remained established that the Chassis Number was embossed to legalize and validate illegal act of smuggling of the vehicle in question by the petitioner. In support of his contention learned counsel referred to the case reported as Ch. Maqbool Ahmed v. Customs, Federal Excise and Sales Tax, Appellate Tribunal and others (2009 PTD 77).

4. We have given due attention to the oral submissions of learned counsel and with his assistance we have seen the record, so also we have gone through the cited case-law. It appears that vehicle in question was imported by Consulate General of France at Karachi which was subsequently sold to Messrs Jardin Fleming Pakistan Broking (Pvt.) Ltd. The permission of the said vehicle was accorded by the Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Foreign Affairs vide letter dated 15-6-1998 in pursuance whereof a sale certificate was also issued by the Consulate General of France in favour of the Company. The Deputy Collector of Customs, Appraisement Group-VII also issued No Objection Certificate A for sale of the same vehicle. The purchaser company, deposited in the year 1998 all the taxes etc. With the Excise and Taxation department. In the coming years the company sold the said vehicle which having changed different names finally came to the lot of the respondent No,8 who got it transferred in, his name. In the NOC issued by the Deputy Collector Customs, Appraisement, it was stated that the vehicle in question was used in Pakistan for over five years as such no customs duty, sales tax and other surcharge were leviable in respect thereof.

5. Perusal of the impugned judgment reflects that the FSL report was not found specific and various queries made by the Investigating Agency remained un-answered. In this behalf learned Division Bench of the High Court observed that, "The FSL report shows that the chassis numbers on the ,vehicle were tampered. The FSL report is not specific and creates doubts as to whether the chassis numbers of the vehicle were erased for the purpose of theft and or for any other purpose.

This issue is not answered in the FSL report though the Directorate of Customs, Intelligence and Investigation had sought report through a letter calling upon FSL to specifically mention the status of chassis numbers. The FSL report is silent on queries made by the investigating agency, except that chassis numbers were tampered. The report of the FSL was insufficient to authorize the Directorate of Customs, Intelligence and Investigation, to detain and or seize the vehicle, inter alia, on the ground that it was smuggled vehicle." When asked, learned counsel had no reply to furnish on the observation so made; however, he admitted that the make, model, Engine number and other material about the vehicle in question were same as were in the documents noted hereinabove.

6. Scanning of the record reflects that the concerned officers of the Directorate, Customs Intelligence, after transfer of the vehicle in question removed its original number plates bearing No, BB-7271 and affixed official number plates bearing No,GP 8695 and started using the same unauthorisedly. This fact surfaced when the Nazir of the High Court visited the site in the office of the Directorate where not only the vehicle in question was found; another vehicle, as well, was found parted with the same official number plate and on enquiry no satisfactory reply could be furnished by the Customs officials. In the circumstances learned Division Bench of the High Court while disposing of the above noted Constitution Petition also directed the Director General Customs, Intelligence and Investigation, who was present in Court, to ensure registration of F.I.R.

Against the concerned officials being custodian of the seized vehicles and utilizing/using the same either for their personal use or for operational purposes by affixing fictitious number plates on the confiscated vehicle.

7. The case cited by the learned counsel is in different circumstance hence not of assistance in this case.

8. In the circumstances, we do not see any merit in this petition IB which is dismissed. Leave refused.