The Calcutta High Court dismissed the charges against the director because the prosecution did not include the company importing liquors, which were not intended for sale, in the complaint case.The background of the case that Duomo Distribution Private Limited, a company established in 2017 by a retired Army Officer with the aim of introducing new foreign liquor brands from Europe to the Indian market.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
In the recent times, the Calcutta High Court has dismissed charges against a company director, highlighting a crucial oversight in the prosecution’s approach to a case involving the importation of foreign liquors. Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) presided over the matter, emphasizing that the company responsible for importing the liquors, which were not intended for sale, was not named as an accused party. This oversight led to the quashing of the complaint against the director, undermine the importance of adhering to legal protocols in cases involving corporate entities.
Read Also: Uttarakhand Civil Code: Mandatory Registration for Live-In Relationships, Right to Maintenance for Women Abandoned by Live-In Partners
The background of the case that Duomo Distribution Private Limited, a company established in 2017 by a retired Army Officer with the aim of introducing new foreign liquor brands from Europe to the Indian market. The company, under the directorship of the petitioner since its inception, was designated as the exclusive importer and marketer in India for prestigious liquor brands, including those from Polini Group Italia SRL, Italy.
The controversy arose when the Bidhannagar Excise Department conducted a raid on the company’s marketing office, resulting in the seizure of 292 bottles of various foreign liquor brands, totaling 218.1 liters. The seizure was predicated on the assertion that the liquors were unregistered and had not had the duty paid on them, suggesting they were intended for the monopoly market, thereby potentially eroding government revenue.
Read Also: Liquor Policy Case | Supreme Court Extends Protection for BRS Leader K Kavitha in Liquor Policy Case
The director was arrested following the raid and subsequently released on bail. The prosecution’s report, citing violations under The Bengal Excise Act, 1909, and the West Bengal (Foreign Liquor) Rules, 1998, failed to acknowledge the company’s assertion that the seized liquors were solely for marketing and promotional purposes, as evidenced by an invoice indicating that the bottles were to be labeled “NOT FOR SALE.”
The court’s decision to quash the proceedings against the director was based on the principle that criminal law does not recognize vicarious liability without the company, as a juristic entity capable of suing and being sued, being made a party to the case. This ruling underscores the nuanced application of law in cases involving corporate entities and the importance of a meticulous legal process.
Represented by counsel Sabyasachi Banerjee for the appellant and Sanjay Bardhan for the respondent, the case, titled Mr. Raj Sahai vs. the State of West Bengal & Anr. (Case No.: CRR 100 of 2020), serves as a precedent in the legal treatment of corporate-related offences and the necessity of including the company as an accused to uphold the integrity of the legal process.
Read Also: Delhi High Court Imposes Status Quo on Land Where 600-Year-Old Mosque Was Demolished
This landmark judgment not only clarifies the application of the Bengal Excise Act, 1909, in relation to offences by companies but also highlights the critical role of proper legal representation and the adherence to legal statutes in ensuring justice and fairness in the corporate sector.
