{"id":224279,"date":"2002-07-30T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-07-29T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002"},"modified":"2015-09-05T21:11:26","modified_gmt":"2015-09-05T15:41:26","slug":"ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002","title":{"rendered":"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS\n\nDATED: 30\/07\/2002\n\nCORAM\n\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.RAJAN\n\nCRIMINAL O.P.No.23137 of 2000 and CRIMINAL O.P.No. 23138 of 2000\nand Criminal O.P.No. 23139 OF 2000\nand\nCRL.M.P.NOS. 8862 TO 8864 OF 2000 AND 965 OF 2001\n\n\nM\/s B.V.Leathers\n147,Vepery High Road\nPeriamet\nChennai 600 003\nrep. by its K.Vinitha   ..Petitioner in Crl.O.P.23137\/2000\n\n\nM\/s Vijayalakshmi Leathers\nrepresented by its Partner\nR.M.Sethuraman\n4, Narayana Chetty Street\nPeriamet\nChennai 600 003         ..Petitioner in Crl.O.P.23138\/2000\n\n\nM\/s Ribi Leathers\nrepresented by its\nProprietor\nK.Kamal Badusha\nPeriamet\nChennai 600 003         ..Petitioner in Crl.O.P.23139\/2000\n\n        vs\n\nSuperintendent of Police\nCBI : EOW\nChennai                         ..Respondent in Crl.O.P.Nos.23137           to 23139\/2000\n\n\n\n        Criminal Original Petition No.23137\/2000 filed to call for the records\nin C.C.No.2 of 1999, on the file of the Principal Special  Judge,  CBI  Cases,\nCity Civil Court Building, Chennai 104 and quash the proceedings therein.\n\n        Crl.O.P.No.23138\/2000  filed  to call for the proceedings in C.C.No.23\n1\/1998 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan  Magistrate,  Economic\nOffences I, Chennai, and quash the same.\n\n        Crl.O.P.No.23139\/2000 filed  to call for the proceedings in C.C.No.  2\n29\/1998 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,  Economic\nOffences I, Chennai, and quash the same.\n\nFor petitioners :  Mr.  V.Ramachandran\n                   Senior Counsel for\n                   M\/s Anitha Sumanth\n\nFor respondent :  Mr.N.Ranganathan\n                Special Public prosecutor\n                for C.B.I.  Cases\n\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>        These  three  Crl.O.Ps are filed by the manufacturers and exporters of<br \/>\nfinished leather.  According to the manufacturers, the production of  finished<br \/>\nleather involves  25 operations and mainly they are technical in nature.  Part<br \/>\nof the operations are manual.  Exports are made through Customs House.    When<br \/>\nthe  goods were tried to be exported, the Assistant Collector took samples and<br \/>\nfound that they did not satisfy the test of finished leather; when  they  were<br \/>\nsent  to  the  Central Leather Research Institute, it found that the same were<br \/>\nnot &#8220;finished leather&#8221; according to the standards fixed by them.    Therefore,<br \/>\nthe containers  containing leathers were seized.  W.P.No.18356\/97 was filed by<br \/>\nthe manufacturers and the goods were taken delivery of on deposit of  5  %  of<br \/>\nthe value of the goods.  Thereafter, the Collector, Customs levied the penalty<br \/>\nand fine  which was equivalent to the value of the goods.  The Commissioner of<br \/>\nCustoms also came to the conclusion based upon  the  opinion  of  the  Central<br \/>\nLeather Research  Institute that the goods were not finished leather.  Against<br \/>\nthat,  the  manufacturers  filed  an  appeal  to  Custom,  Excise   and   Gold<br \/>\n(Control)Appellate Tribunal.(  CEGAT).  CEGAT accepted the plea of the accused<br \/>\nand set aside the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>        2.In the mean while the Criminal  prosecution  was  launched  in  C.C.<br \/>\nNos.2\/1999, 231\/1998 and 229\/1999 and witnesses were examined.\n<\/p>\n<p>        3.At   this  stage,  the  petitions  have  been  filed  to  quash  the<br \/>\ncomplaints.\n<\/p>\n<p>        4.The learned Senior  Counsel  Mr.V.    Ramachandran  for  M\/s  Anitha<br \/>\nSumanth appearing  on  behalf  of the petitioners relied on two decisions.  In<br \/>\nthe first decision  in  <a href=\"\/doc\/386737\/\">MOHAMED  I.    UNJAWALA  AND  OTHERS  V.     ASSISTANT<br \/>\nCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (VOL.213 ITR<\/a> 190) it has been held that,<br \/>\n&#8220;The findings of the Tribunal on the facts are final and the High Court has no<br \/>\njurisdiction  to  go  behind  the  statements  of  fact  made by the Tribunal.<br \/>\nTherefore, the criminal court is bound to accept the findings of the Tribunal,<br \/>\non questions of fact.&#8221;&#8230;..&#8221;But the facts found by the Tribunal in  favour  of<br \/>\nthe  assessee  cannot  be  disturbed  by the High Court as the Tribunal is the<br \/>\nfact-finding authority.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Another decision  in  H.T.L.LIMITED  V.    UNION  OF  INDIA   (   1999   (113)<br \/>\nE.L.T.30(Mad.)it has been held that continuation of proceedings misplaced once<br \/>\nadjudicating authority and Tribunal have held that there was no wilful default<br \/>\nor intention to evade Central Excise duty on assessee&#8217;s part.\n<\/p>\n<p>        5.Relying upon these two decisions, the learned Senior counsel submits<br \/>\nthat  the  Tribunal  has given a finding on fact that it was not an unfinished<br \/>\nleather, but it is only a finished leather and therefore, set aside the  order<br \/>\nof confiscation  imposed  by the Commissioner of Customs.  Hence, this finding<br \/>\nthat the goods were not unfinished has to be accepted by the Trial  Court  and<br \/>\nit is  binding  upon  the Criminal Court.  Therefore, there is no need for the<br \/>\npetitioners herein to face the prosecution even after the decision rendered by<br \/>\nthe Tribunal.  Therefore, the petitioners have a right to approach this  Court<br \/>\nunder 48 2 Cr.P.C.\n<\/p>\n<p>        6.The  learned  Senior  Counsel also pointed out that the charges that<br \/>\nare framed against the petitioners are under Section 420 read 511, 46  8,  471<br \/>\nI.P.C.  and  132,  114 of the Customs Act.  The learned Senior Counsel submits<br \/>\nthat I.P.C.  offences are only consequential of offences  under  Customs  Act.<br \/>\nOnce the  offences under Customs Act goes the prosecution under I.P.C.  cannot<br \/>\nstand.  Therefore, the entire proceedings are  liable  to  be  quashed.    The<br \/>\nlearned  Senior  counsel pointed out that the Tribunal in its order has stated<br \/>\nthat,<br \/>\n&#8216;The whole dispute has arisen only  because  of  variations,  inaccuracies  in<br \/>\nmechanical  operations  or  the  difference  between  experts and traders with<br \/>\nregard to grades.  There was no effort to export prohibited goods.&#8217;<br \/>\nTherefore, this finding that there was no effort to export prohibited goods is<br \/>\na finding of fact and it is binding on  the  parties  including  the  criminal<br \/>\ncourt.  Therefore,  I.P.C.   offences which is germane from the offences under<\/p>\n<p>Customs Act also cannot stand.  Therefore, in the interests  of  justice,  the<br \/>\npetitioners have  a right to approach this Court under Section 482 I.P.C.  and<br \/>\nthe complaints pending against them are liable to be quashed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        7.Mr.N.Renganathan, Special Public Prosecutor for C.B.I cases  submits<br \/>\nthat  in Criminal cases connected to Crl.O.P.No.23137\/2000 all the prosecution<br \/>\nwitnesses except the Investigating Officer has been examined;  in  so  far  as<br \/>\nCrl.O.P.No.23138\/2000  and  23139  of  2000  are concerned all the prosecution<br \/>\nwitnesses have been examined and questions under Section  313  Cr.P.C.    also<br \/>\nover.   On  the  side  of the defence witnesses, one of the witnesses has been<br \/>\nexamined.  Therefore, at this stage, the petitions under Section 482 does  not<br \/>\nlie and  therefore, these petitions are liable to be dismissed.  In support of<br \/>\nthis contention, the learned Special Public Prosecutor pointed out a  decision<br \/>\nin <a href=\"\/doc\/32908\/\">AMAR CHAND  AGARWALA  V.    SHANTI  BOSE  AND  ANOTHER<\/a> (1973 Crl.L.J.  577)<br \/>\nwherein it has been held as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Where the accused moved the High Court at the time when the trial was  almost<br \/>\ncommitting  to a close and what remained to be done was the examination of two<br \/>\nprosecution and one Court witnesses and the High Court quashed the charge  and<br \/>\nthe entire proceedings on the grounds that the complainant suppressed material<br \/>\nfacts  and  that the evidence on record did not establish the alleged offence,<br \/>\nthe order was liable to be set aside.  The proper course at that stage  to  be<br \/>\nadopted by the High Court was to allow the proceedings to go on and to come to<br \/>\nits  logical  conclusion,  one way or the other, and decline to interfere with<br \/>\nthose proceedings.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>        8.The learned Special Public Prosecutor  also  pointed  out  that  the<br \/>\nTribunal has passed this order mainly for the reason that,<br \/>\n&#8220;the  appellants  are  only  seeking  permission to take the goods back to the<br \/>\nunits and to make good the deficiencies.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>The Tribunal was influenced only on the request made  by  the  petitioners  to<br \/>\ntake  back  the  goods  for  the purpose of rectification of the deficiencies.<br \/>\nTherefore, this is not the reason for allowing the appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>        It has no bearing on the complaints before the Criminal Court.  In the<br \/>\ncomplaints before the Criminal Courts they  have  attempted  to  export  these<br \/>\ngoods.   Once  goods  were found to have crossed the customs barriers into the<br \/>\nport for the purpose of export, attempt to export  is  complete.    Therefore,<br \/>\nwhen  the  goods  were found to be deficient with the standard prescribed, the<br \/>\nattempt to export deficient goods is also complete.  Therefore,  the  judgment<br \/>\nof  the  Tribunal has no bearing on the complaints pending before the Criminal<br \/>\nCourt.\n<\/p>\n<p>        9.Further, the learned Special Public Prosecutor pointed out  that  in<br \/>\nthis case  complaints  are  filed  on a police report.  Once charges have been<br \/>\nframed it can end either in  acquittal  or  in  conviction.    Therefore,  the<br \/>\npetitions to  discharge  cannot  be  filed.  The petitions to discharge can be<br \/>\nfiled only at the earliest point of time before  framing  of  charges.    Once<br \/>\ncharges are  framed,  the  only end is acquittal or conviction.  Further, when<br \/>\nthere is a specific provision under Section 239 Cr.P.C., resort to Section 482<br \/>\nCr.P.C.  is not permissible.  Section 482 Cr.P.C.  will apply only when  there<br \/>\nis no  specific  provision.    For this reason, the petitions filed herein are<br \/>\nliable to be dismissed and they have no merits.\n<\/p>\n<p>        10.This Court, at this stage, does not want to go into the  merits  of<br \/>\nthis case.   Any opinion expressed by this Court may cause prejudice to either<br \/>\nof the parties before Criminal Court.  As held by the  Supreme  Court  in  the<br \/>\ndecision 1973  Crl.L.J.    577  when the proceedings before the Criminal Court<br \/>\nhave also reached final stage,  it  is  not  proper  for  the  this  Court  to<br \/>\ninterfere under Section 482 Cr.P.C.  and quash the complaints.  Therefore, the<br \/>\nCrl.O.P.Nos.23137 to  23139  of  2000  are  dismissed.   Consequently, all the<br \/>\nconnected pending Crl.M.Ps.  are also dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>        11.The petitioners are entitled to raise all these points  before  the<br \/>\nTrial Court.    On  considering the same, the Trial Court shall pass orders on<br \/>\nmerits.\n<\/p>\n<p>30-07-2002<\/p>\n<p>index:yes<br \/>\ninternet:yes<br \/>\nsal<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.  Principal Special Judge<br \/>\nCBI cases<br \/>\nCity Civil Court<br \/>\nMadras 104<\/p>\n<p>2.The Superintendent of Police<br \/>\nCBI, E.O.W, Chennai<\/p>\n<p>3.Additional Chief Metropolitan<br \/>\nMagistrate, E.O.I.\n<\/p>\n<p>Chennai<\/p>\n<p>A.K.RAJAN,J.\n<\/p>\n<p>Criminal Original Petition NOs.  23137 to 23139 of 2000  and  Crl.M.P.    Nos.<br \/>\n8862 to 8864<br \/>\nof 2000 and 965 of 2001<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 30\/07\/2002 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.RAJAN CRIMINAL O.P.No.23137 of 2000 and CRIMINAL O.P.No. 23138 of 2000 and Criminal O.P.No. 23139 OF 2000 and CRL.M.P.NOS. 8862 TO 8864 OF 2000 AND 965 OF [&hellip;]<\/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":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-224279","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2002-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-09-05T15:41:26+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=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002\",\"datePublished\":\"2002-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-05T15:41:26+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\"},\"wordCount\":1425,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2002-07-29T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-09-05T15:41:26+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002\"}]},{\"@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":"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; 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\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2002-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-09-05T15:41:26+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":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002","datePublished":"2002-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-05T15:41:26+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002"},"wordCount":1425,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002","name":"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2002-07-29T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-09-05T15:41:26+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-b-v-leathers-vs-superintendent-of-police-on-30-july-2002#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S B.V.Leathers vs Superintendent Of Police on 30 July, 2002"}]},{"@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\/224279","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=224279"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/224279\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=224279"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=224279"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=224279"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}