{"id":1878,"date":"1985-12-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1985-12-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985"},"modified":"2018-03-10T16:18:28","modified_gmt":"2018-03-10T10:48:28","slug":"collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985","title":{"rendered":"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985"},"content":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Tamil Nadu<\/div>\n
Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985<\/div>\n
Equivalent citations: 1987 (12) ECR 1129 Tri Chennai, 1986 (26) ELT 787 Tri Chennai<\/div>\n<\/p>\n
<\/pre>\n
ORDER<\/p>\n
 S. Kalyanam, Member (J)<\/p>\n
1. This reference application by the Collector of Customs, Madras, is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 27-5-85 in No.C\/144\/83 in terms of Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 hereinafter referred to as the Act. The following questions have been formulated in the pleadings as questions of law arising out of the impugned order of the Tribunal meriting reference to the High Court:\n<\/p>\n
(1)  In  view of the  specific  provisions of the Customs Act envisaged under   Section  122   and   137   vesting   the   powers   of   adjudication as   well   as  sanction  of  prosecution,   with  the  same  authority  by the legislature, whether it is correct to hold that the adjudicating authority   who   has   sanctioned   prosecution   is   not   competent   to adjudicate the case and he has prejudged the issue?\n<\/p>\n
(2)  Can   the   adjudicating   authority   said  to  have  been  influenced  by his  executive  decision  to  sanction  prosecution  under Section  135 of the Customs Act,  1962 and thus become disqualified for adjudicating  the   case  in   exercise  of  the  powers  vested  to him   under Section 122 of the Customs Act, 1962?\n<\/p>\n
(3)  Are   Section  122   and   137   of   the  Customs  Act,     1962   mutually exclusive?\n<\/p>\n
2. The learned\/Senior Departmental Representative expatiating on the questions formulated above submitted that the Tribunal by- the impugned order set aside the order of the Additional Collector of Customs, Madras, dated 18-9-82 and remitted the matter back for readjudication, not on merits but on a technical ground that the Additional Collector, who, on application of mind into the facts of the case, accorded sanction, should not have adjudicated the same, particularly in the context of an apprehension expressed by the respondent herein by his application dated 29-3-82 on grounds of natural justice. It was urged that according sanction is a statutory duty and not a direction for prosecution and therefore, the sanctioning authority is competent to adjudicate. It was further submitted that prior sanction by the competent authority under Section 137 of the Act is a condition precedent for valid initiation of a prosecution under Section 135 of the Act, and if the sanctioning authority is precluded from adjudicating the cases, he would not be able to exercise the statutory powers and duties under Section 122 of the Act. The learned SDR submitted that the order of the Tribunal if given effect to would apparently render Section 132 and 137 mutually repugnant and exclusive, and as the issue is one of vital public and legal importance, it would merit reference to the High Court. He also placed reliance on a ruling of the Supreme Court reported in 1953 MLJ page 17 in the case of Rameshwar Bhartia v. The State of Assam.<\/a>\n<\/p>\n
3.   The  learned  counsel  for  the  respondent  urged  that a  scrutiny of the  sanction  order  would  reveal  that  the  Additional  Collector  had  made up  his   mind   with   reference  to  the guilt of  the respondent  and  in such a   situation   principles   of   fairplay   and   natural   justice   require   that  some other   authority  should   have   adjudicated   the   same.   It   was  further  urged that   irrespective   of  bias  on   the   part  of  the  adjudicating  authority  the issue will have to be adjudged from the stand point of a genuine apprehension   in   the  mind  of  the  respondent  that  he  would not get  fair trial  in such   a   situation.   Therefore,   it   was   urged   that   the   Department   having acquiesced in the correctness of the impugned order of the Tribunal and more  so,  acted on  the same by commencing de novo proceedings by the issue of show cause notice which has also been responded by the respondent herein, the Department would be estopped from filing this reference application.\n<\/p>\n
4.    The   learned   SDR   in   reply  submitted  that  commencement  of  de novo   proceedings   by   the   Department   pursuant   to   the   remand   order   of the  Tribunal is a post decisional  factor which would not militate against the  pre-existing  right of  the  Department  to  take out  an application for reference in terms of Section 130(1) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
5.   I   have   carefully   considered   the   submissions   urged   before   me. The grant. of sanction in law is a solemn one and a statutory duty is cast on  the  sanctioning, authority, to apply its mind into ail the relevant facts constituting the offence and arrive at a decision on evaluation and consideration  of  the  same.   This aspect of the matter has been dealt  with in extenso in the impugned order of the Tribunal in paragraph 5 and therefore, it  is  superfluous  to  repeat  the  same  here.  Nobody  can  quarrel  with the proposition  that according sanction  is a  statutory duty  under Section 137 of the Act.  But the whole question here is whether the sanctioning authority in the course of formation of an opinion for according sanction could be   said   to  have  entertained  an   impression  or  a  feeling about  the guilt of the person concerned and whether in the context of a criminal prosecution   launched   prior   to  adjudiction,   an  apprehension   in   the   mind  of  the respondent   that   he   may   not    get   fair   or   unbiased   trial   or   adjudication at the hands of the Additional Collector in the instant case is reasonable, bonafide   or   genuine   or   totally   fanciful,   imaginary   and   capricious.   The fundamental principle of natural justice is that in the case of quasi-judicial proceedings,      the   authority   empowered   to   decide   the   dispute   between opposing parties must  be one without bias towards one side or the other in the dispute. Tribunals or authorities who are entrusted with quasi-judicial functions are as much bound by the relevant principles governing “doctrine of bias” as in other judicial Tribunals. The principles governing the doctrine of bias vis-a-vis,   judicial Tribunals are well settled and they are typified by the maxims known in common law as “audi alteram partem” and “Nemo debet   esse   judex   in   propria  sua  cusua”.   The  quintessences   of   the  legal wisdom   embedded   in  the  aforesaid  and  other  common  law   Sega!  maxims is that<\/p>\n
(1)  no man shall be condemned unheard;<\/p>\n
\n \n\n(2)  no man shall be a judge in his own case; and\n \n\n(3)  justice   should   not   only   be   done   but   manifestly    and   undoubtedly seem to be done \n \n\n(emphasis applied).\n \n\n<\/pre>\n
In applying the bias rule, the test is not whether in fact a bias has affected the judgment but the test is always and must be whether a litigant could reasonably apprehend that a bias attributable to a member of the Tribunal might have operated against him in the final decision of the Tribunal. This facet of natural justice has been highlighted by the ratio decidendi in the ruling of the Supreme court in the case of Manak Lal v. Premchand – AIR 1957 SC 425. In deciding the question of bias, human probabilities and ordinary course of conduct must be taken into consideration. No doubt, the question as to whether an enquiry of adjudication has been in conformity with the canons of natural justice would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. In the instant case, the respondent herein by an application dated 29.3.82 made a plea before the adjudicating authority that he having accorded sanction should not adjudicate and submitted “you have pre-judged the issue and made up your mind” and that “in all fairness the case ought not be adjudicated by you, for there will be gross violation of the principles of natural justice.” After this plea was turned down by the adjudicating authority, the respondent participated in the proceedings “without prejudice to his rights and contentions” as expressed in the petition dated 24.7.82. The various correspondence between the adjudicating authority and the respondent forming part of the materials in the case leaves no room tor doubt that they continued to join issue at every stage of the adjudicating proceedings on various matters. The adjudicating authority in his letter dated 3.8.82, inter alia, has levelled a charge against the respondent of “prolonging the proceedings on some pretext or the other”, which was repudiated by the respondent by his letter dated 4.8.82 adverting to prejudging of the issue and attributing the inordinate delay from March to July in adjudication to the adjudicating authority. Whatever may be the truth or otherwise, one thing is certain that the respondent herein has clearly expressed want of confidence in the impartiality of the adjudicating authority who also has taken in tenacious stand with reference to his legal competence to proceed with the adjudication notwithstanding the expression of want of confidence by the respondent. In such a situation of factual controversy with reference to procedural propriety resorted to by either of the side it need hardly be said that it is expedient that the adjudication should have been made over to some other authority. As the Supreme Court has held it is of the essence of judicial trial that the atmosphere in which it is held must be of calm detachment and dispassionate and unbiased application- of mind. Therefore, in a situation as the one that existed in the present case, human probabilities and ordinary course of conduct would be factors relevant and determinative of the question of bias. After all, principles of natural justice explained above could not be encapsuled into the straight jacket of a rigid formula nor will it be proper to borrow the felicitous metaphor of Lord Wright” to force it into any Procrustean bed”.\n<\/p>\n
6. The ruling relied upon by the learned SDR is clearly distinguishable on the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the Rameshwar Bhartia case, relied upon by the SDR, the Supreme Court was concerned to construe the connotation and legal signification of the word ‘personal interest’ in interpreting Section 556 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (V of 1898). In that case the sanction accorded by the District Magistrate was on the basis of a short note written out and “sent to him by the Procurement Inspector. The facts did not disclose that the District Magistrate perused all relevant facts and materials. Apart from it, in the factual background of that case, the Supreme Court was of the view that the accord of sanction by the District Magistrate in that case would not tantamount to direction within the meaning of. illustration to Section 556 Cr. P.C. referred to supra. I perused the sanction order in the present case. It states that the respondent herein and others “devised and executed their plan to illegally import the above mentioned goods of foreign origin and attempted to evade duties of customs payable on the goods and also the prohibitions and restrictions applicable to the goods on import under me imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947″, and by their acts of commission and omission rendered the goods liable to confiscation under Sections 111(d), (e), (1) and 115(1) and (2) and Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947”, and “on the basis of facts and materials available, I am satisfied that the above mentioned A.I. A.2, A.3 and A. (respondent herein) should be prosecuted for the offences under Section 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act, 1962”. The wordings in the sanction order clearly signifies that the sanctioning authority on perusal of the materials reached a conclusion that the respondent herein and others devised and executed their plan of illegal import of goods of foreign origin and by their acts of commission and omission rendered the goods liable to confiscation and the respondent and others should be prosecuted for the offences. In the context of the factual background of this case, the language employed in the sanction order leaves no room for doubt in my mind that the sanctioning authority has not only made up his mind about the guilt of the respondent but also has expressed an opinion that he and others’ “should be prosecuted for the offences”. This finding of the superior officer like that of an Additional Collector is certainly in the nature of command and would undoubtedly partake the character of an official direction.\n<\/p>\n
7.    As   has   been   pointed   out   by   the   Supreme   Court   in   the  aforesaid ruling,   “the   question   on   whether   a   Magistrate   is   personally   interested or  not  has essentially  to be decided  on  the  facts in each  case.  Pecuniary interest,   however,   small   will   be   a   disqualification,   but   as   regards other kinds   of   interest   there   is   no   measure   or   standard   except   that   it   should be a substantial one giving rise to a real bias or a reasonable apprehension on   the   part   of   the   accused   of   such   bias”   (emphasis   applied).   Indeed,   in the   impugned   order   of   the   Tribunal   has   observed   that   “as   principles   of natural   justice   revolve   round   fairplay   in   action,   justice   should   not   only be done  but must seem to be done”. The law has regard not so much perhaps  to the  motives  which  might  be  supposed  to bias  the  judge as to the susceptibilities of  the  litigant  parties. One important object, at all events, is   to   clear   away   everything   which   might  engender   suspicion  and  distruct of the tribunal, and so to promote the feeling of confidence in the administration   of   justice   which   is   so   essential   to   social   order   and   security.   It is   common   knowledge   that   when   a   judicial   confession   under   Section  164 Cr. P.C. is recorded by a Judicial Magistrate, he would not hold the committal  enquiries  in  relation  to the  case triable by a Court  of  Session,  when law  provided  for  such  a  commital  enquiry.   Likewise,  even  with  reference to   transfer   of   proceedings   from   one   court   to   another   court   the   Court have  consistently   held  that   the  guiding  facts  would  be  whether  the  facts or  circumstances  urged  for  transfer  are  calculated  to create in the mind of   the   applicant   seeking   transfer   a   justifiable   apprehension   that   he   may not   have   a   fair   and   impartial  trial.  In  the   instant  case,  on  the  basis  of the   circumstances   relating   to   sanction   and   a   plea  of  apprehension  about fair   trial   expressed   by   the   respondent,   a   finding   has   been   given   by   the Tribunal   that   on  the  grounds  of  natural   justice  and   fairplay,  adjudication should be by different authority.\n<\/p>\n
8.    The  plea of  the  learned  SDR  that  the  view  taken  by  the  Tribunal in   the  impugned  order   would  create  a  conflict   between  Sections   122  and 137   of   the   Act   is   without   basis.   Section  122(a)   deals   with   adjudication of   confiscation   and   penalties   without   limit   by   a   Collector   of   Customs or  a  Deputy  Collector  of  Customs.  As  per  Section 2(8) “Collector of Customs”   includes  an  Additional  Collector  of  Customs.  Therefore,  when  there are    a  Collector   and  an   Additional  Collector,  one  can   be  the  sanctioning authority   while   any   one   of   the   rest   in  Collector  or   Additional  Collector or  Deputy  Collector  can  be  the  adjudicating authority and I  fail to appreciate how one could ever spell out a conflict between Section 122 vis-a-vis 137 of the Act. Assuming argumendo that the finding of the Tribunal is apt to create administrative difficulties, it should not be difficult to notify certain category of officers as Collectors within the meaning of Section 137 for the limited purpose of according sanction.\n<\/p>\n
9.   The   plea  of  the  respondent  that  the  Department  having  accepted the  finding  of   the  Tribunal  in  the  impugned order   and  commenced  fresh adjudication   proceedings   by   issue   of   show   cause   notice   which   has  also been responded to; would   not   have   the   right   of   reference  under   the   Act is legally untenable. As rightly pointed out by the learned SDR acts initiated by the Department subsequent to the order of the Tribunal and in conformity  thereto, would not destroy or nullify the pres-existing right of reference in terms of Section 130(1) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n
10.  In the result the reference application is rejected.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal – Tamil Nadu Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 Equivalent citations: 1987 (12) ECR 1129 Tri Chennai, 1986 (26) ELT 787 Tri Chennai ORDER S. Kalyanam, Member (J) 1. This reference application by the Collector of Customs, Madras, is directed against the order of the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1878","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-allahabad-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nCollector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1985-12-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-03-10T10:48:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"13 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985\",\"datePublished\":\"1985-12-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-10T10:48:28+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\"},\"wordCount\":2543,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Allahabad High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\",\"name\":\"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1985-12-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-03-10T10:48:28+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1985-12-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-03-10T10:48:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"13 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985","datePublished":"1985-12-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-10T10:48:28+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985"},"wordCount":2543,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Allahabad High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985","name":"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1985-12-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-03-10T10:48:28+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/collector-of-customs-vs-prehlad-singh-chadda-on-30-december-1985#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Collector Of Customs vs Prehlad Singh Chadda on 30 December, 1985"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1878","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1878"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1878\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1878"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1878"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1878"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}