TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 166X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... non-examination of an independent witness joined at the time of alleged recovery is no disqualification to the case of the prosecution - Petitioner does not challenge the order of conviction on merits and restricts his prayer to the quantum of sentence - a lenient view can be taken on the quantum of sentence of the petitioner - As per Section 135 of the Act, the conviction for an offence which exceeds one Crore of rupees may extend to seven years and as per proviso it should not be less than one year - In the present case, 400 biscuits were recovered and their value was assessed at ₹ 1,53,91,200/- - As per the custody certificate, Roop Singh-petitioner has undergone 1 year 2 months and 12 days in custody out of substantive sentence of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccused Roop Singh was found roaming nearby in suspicious circumstances. He was taken to a place from where four jackets were recovered from beneath the earth. Villagers were also called and they witnessed the entire occurrence. All the four jackets were opened by the B.S.F officials to find that they were carrying concealed in them 400 biscuits of gold of foreign origin. They were taken into possession by the Inspector Customs. On 22.6.1990, Roop Singh suffered a statement under Section 108 of the Act in the presence of Sh. S.K Mehta, Superintendent Customs (Preventive), Amritsar admitting recovery and seizure of 400 gold biscuits from him in the manner as aforesaid. He further stated that one Swaran Singh alias Samma met him on 18.6.1990 a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n defence, the accused examined one Baj Singh of Village Dal as DW-1 who testified that a B.S.F party had called the accused to the Border Post on 20.6.1990 and he was made to sign on certain blank papers though no recovery was effected from the accused in his presence. The trial Court after going through the entire evidence led by the prosecution, convicted and sentenced the accused-petitioner in the aforesaid terms. The statement made by the accused under Section 108 of the Customs Act is not hit by the bar prescribed by Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act. In this regard a reference has been made to a judgment titled, 'Alias Vs. Collector of Customs, AIR 1970 SC 1065'. As held by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in ' Bha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od of one year and three months and a fine of ₹ 1500 on the first count and on the second count he has been directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one years and to pay a fine of L 1500. It was held that more than a decade has passed since the date of the commission of the crime and having regard to the fact that the Gold Control Act has since been repealed, substantive sentence of the appellant was reduced to the already undergone by him. He has further placed reliance on a judgment titled, Jeevraj B. Jain vs. Central Excise and Customs Deptt.and another 2000 (1) SCC 270, where the accused was found to be in possession of 600 gold biscuits each weighing 10 tolas.As per the confessional statement of the accused they had kept the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
