| Case ID |
43ba27c2-e0f3-48c2-a929-7a5ec588d261 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
S.C.R. Appln. Nos. 1 to 19 of 2022 |
| Decision Date |
Apr 25, 2022 |
| Hearing Date |
Apr 14, 2022 |
| Decision |
The Quetta High Court dismissed the appeals filed by the Customs Authorities against the decisions of the Appellate Tribunal regarding the confiscation of vehicles involved in smuggling cases. The court found that there was no substantial evidence to link the vehicle owners with the smuggling activities, emphasizing that the mere involvement of drivers does not implicate vehicle owners unless a direct role is established. The court upheld the tribunal's decision to release the vehicles upon payment of a 20% redemption fine on their customs value, reinforcing the principle that confiscation of common carriers is not justifiable without direct evidence of their involvement in smuggling. |
| Summary |
In the case of S.C.R. Appln. Nos. 1 to 19 of 2022, the Quetta High Court addressed multiple appeals concerning the confiscation of vehicles involved in smuggling activities under the Customs Act, 1969. The court examined the evidence presented by the Customs Authorities and found it inadequate to establish a connection between the vehicle owners and the alleged smuggling. The ruling emphasized the legal standard that vehicle owners cannot be penalized without direct evidence of their involvement in the crimes committed by drivers. This case highlights the legal protections afforded to individuals whose vehicles are used in unlawful activities without their knowledge. The decision reinforces the need for clear evidence in customs and smuggling cases, ensuring that the rights of vehicle owners are upheld in the face of allegations. This case serves as a precedent in customs law, particularly in matters relating to the confiscation of vehicles and the burden of proof required to substantiate claims of smuggling. It also illustrates the complexities of customs enforcement and the legal principles governing the seizure of property. The decision is significant for legal practitioners and those involved in customs law, emphasizing the importance of due process and the protection of property rights. |
| Court |
Quetta High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Respondents,
Customs Authorities
|
| Judges |
Muhammad Ejaz Swati,
Abdullah Baloch
|
| Lawyers |
M/s. Nusratullah Baloch and Muhammad Naseem Qureshi, Advocates for Appellants,
M/s. Hussain Ahmed & Shahzaib Kamal Baloch, Advocates for Respondents
|
| Petitioners |
COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE OF CUSTOMS, CUSTOM HOUSE, GAWADAR and others
|
| Respondents |
ABDUL QADIR and others
|
| Citations |
2023 SLD 7091 = 2023 PLJ 141
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Customs Act, 1969
|
| Sections |
2(s),
16,
156(1)(8)(89),
157(2)
|