TMI Blog1977 (7) TMI 94X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant and the other told the officer that they were the officers of the CBI and they had come to see one Mr. Chavan. They also produced the identity cards. The appellant also placed the brief case he was carrying on the ground near his feet. When questioned about the contents of the brief case, the appellant disowned the same. The officer, therefore, informed the Assistant Collector Airport and others. The Assistant Collector also questioned the appellant and he denied the ownership of the brief case and he appeared nervous and also gave vague replies. Thereafter at the instance of the Assistant Collector, the contents of the brief case was examined in the presence of panchas and found to contain Indian currency note of Rs. 50/- denomination, wrist watches of foreign origin numbering 405 in all collectively valued at Rs. 30,675/- (c.i.b.) and Rs. 61,350/- (m.v.). The said goods were seized under a panchnama in the reasonable belief that they were liable to confiscation under the C.A. The brief case was also seized. 3. In the course of investigation, the residential premises of the appellant was also searched on the same day in the presence of panchas under a search warrant. Durin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on behalf of the appellant. The Board as well as the Collector failed to appreciate that the appellant could have pointed out to an Arab passenger whom the Customs Officer have suspected. 8. The Board and the Collector made much of the inconsistencies and the explanation as to the appellant s presence in the baggage hall but then the inconsistency in the explanation would not be sufficient to bring home the guilt or to connect the appellant with the contraband goods. 9. The Collector as well as the Board were unjustified in drawing an inference that recovery of echolac brief case and two wrist watches found in the residence of the appellant would be sufficient to corroborate the case of the Department. Both the authorities failed to notice that similar brief cases are manufactured in thousands. 10. The Collector as well as the Board failed to bear in mind that the burden of establishing that the seized bag and the contraband belonged to the appellant was on the Department and they had wrongly cast the burden on the appellant just because his explanation as to his presence in the baggage hall was found to be inconsistent. 11. Both the authorities failed to appreciate the exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ties. Shri Ved therefore prayed that the personal penalty imposed on the appellant may be set aside. 20. Shri Prabhu appearing for the Collector, however, urged that the order passed by the Collector and confirmed by the Board does not suffer from any infirmity. There is no reason to disbelieve the statements of two Customs Officers. Their evidence if believed clearly establish the guilt of the appellant. Shri Prabhu also contended that the appellant and another had no reason to be present in the baggage hall. Their unexplained presence also should be taken into consideration while appreciating the various circumstances and the evidence relied on by the Collector as well as the Board. Shri Prabhu finally prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 21. I have carefully considered the submissions made on both the sides. The short question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the penalty imposed by the Additional Collector and confirmed by the Board requires to be interfered with. From the orders passed by the authorities below it is clear that they had relied on the statements of the two Customs Officers to hold that the suitcase containing contraband wrist watches wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 23. Let me proceed to scrutinise the above contentions of Shri Ved It is not the law that the evidence of Customs Officers requires corroboration before the same can be accepted or made use of to bring home the guilt of a person charged with an offence. Therefore, there is no merit in the legal contention as to the admissibility of the evidence of the Customs Officer. It is settled law that uncorroborated testimony of a Police officer can be made a basis for a conviction provided the testimony of the Police Officer was found to be trustworthy and can be relied upon. When such being the case, there cannot be any legal hurdle to accept the uncorroborated testimony of a Customs Officer if that testimony is found to be trustworthy and acceptable. As in the case of the testimony of a Police officer the testimony of Customs officer requires stricter scrutiny before the same is accepted. 24. The contention of Shri Ved that because the CBI officers have jurisdiction over Customs Officers and because they could watch the activities of the Customs Officer, the Customs Officers in this case have every reason to fasely implicate the appellant is extremely difficult to accept. It is not th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no reason to disbelieve their statements. Shri Ved had contended that the testimony of the two officers could not be tested with reference to their earlier statements since their statements were not recorded and also because the report said to have been submitted by Shri Samuel Raj had not been produced. It is not the case of Shri Ved that there was a practice of recording the statements of Customs Officers. If there was no such practice, non-recording of the statements cannot be made a ground to discredit their testimony. As stated earlier, the appellant sought cross-examination of both the officers and they were cross- examined by two counsels. They had not swerved nor shaken by the cross-examination and their evidence has been consistent. 26. Shri Ved had also urged that the appellant was a CB1 officer and he held an identity card and if really he was in possession of a brief case containing contraband goods he need not have wandered in the baggage hall. He could have easily cleared out by showing his identity card. There is no force in this contention. These are only the possibilities. How a person would react when he is conscious of his guilt cannot be easily envisaged. Furt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
