1960 (10) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT

Whether onus of proving the import of the goods lay on the appellant?

Held that:- We cannot accept the contention that by reason of the provisions of Section 106 of the Evidence Act the onus lies on the appellant to prove that he brought the said items of goods into India in 1947. If Section 106 of the Evidence Act is applied, then, by analogy, the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence must equally be invoked. If so, it follows that the onus to prove the case against the appellant is on the Customs authorities and they failed to discharge that burden in respect of Items 1 to 5. The order of confiscation relating to Items 1 to 5 is set aside.

Coming to Items 6 to 10, we have no reason to reject, as we have been asked to do, the statement made in the order of the Collector of Central Excise dated October 27, 1951, that the appellant accepted that Items 6 to 10 were smuggled goods from Pakistan. having regard to the circumstances under, and the manner, in which the said confession was made, we have no reason to doubt the correctness of the statements of fact in regard to this matter made in the orders of the Customs authorities. If so, it follows that the finding of the Customs authorities that the appellant purchased the said items, which were smuggled goods, should prevail. The order of confiscation of these five items will, therefore, stand. Appeal partly allowed.