TMI Blog2007 (7) TMI 132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8-7-97, a passenger disembarking from a Singapore flight was carrying a black zipper bag. His name was Satpal Singh. He was a Malaysian passport holder. He allegedly entered the customs area and proceeded to the green channel. Upon being questioned about whether he had any dutiable items like gold etc. he responded in the negative. The X-ray screening of his hand bag did not indicate anything but the metal detector indicated presence of some objects on his person. After giving notice, he was searched in the presence of two witnesses. He was found wearing a specially designed bag of velvet cloth underneath his clothes. These contained seven gold bars of foreign origin of one kg. each. The contraband was valued at Rs. 31.5 lakhs and Rs. 41.67 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. This time also Sunil was to meet me outside the Airport and take away the gold. I have stayed in Sis Ganj Gurudwara and was to go back on 23-7-99 by SQ 407? I knew Abdul Mohammad since last 7 years because he has business. The masjor India Kuala Lumpur. I first came to know him when he hired my van. I used to drive the van myself at that time he used to come acess …. and knew that I was not making enough money. About two years back, he suggested that if I carry gold for him, he would given me good money and I agreed. Whenever he wanted to send the gold to India, he used to call me at his office in Kuala Lumpur in the name of S.M. Mohammad and gave the gold to me along with enough money to buy air ticket and to carry my expenses. I used ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it held that the confession of a co-accused person cannot be treated as substantive evidence and can be pressed into service only when the Court is inclined to accept other evidence; if it feels the necessity of seeking assurance in support of its conclusion deducible from it. He also relied upon the judgment of this Court in Om Prakash Baksh v. State - 1989 Crl. L.J. 1207. 6.Learned counsel urged that the only material to establish a link between the present petitioner and a co-accused was the allegedly recovered visiting card. That objective material apart from the inadmissible statement if taken together could establish nothing. In these circumstances, requiring the petitioner to stand trial would not only be a futile exercise but may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t any stage. This was taken into consideration by the trial Court which noticed that the petitioner though served with notices under Section 108 did not respond and report to the concerned officer. He further submitted that the co-accused was absconding and not appearing in the trial. 9.It is no doubt true that in Haricharan Kurmi's case the Supreme Court held that a confession should be taken into consideration if it is for the purpose of reassuring that the other materials indicate guilt of the accuse. Yet, in a later decision, of a Constitution Bench, i.e. Illias v. Collector of Customs - 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1427 (S.C.) = AIR 1970 SC 1065 the Supreme Court held that Customs authorities have been invested under the Act with many powers of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule applies, whether there be one accomplice or more and that the confessing co-accused cannot be placed higher than an accomplice." On consideration of the evidence, this Court had held in para 13 that the "Customs Authorities served notices upon various suspects and recorded their statements in answer to these notices. The statements of Kashinath (Ex. A) and Bengali (Ex. Z-27) were recorded on the 15th, the former by Karnik (PW 24) and the latter by Rane (PW 26). These statements were recorded simultaneously or almost simultaneously. The statement of Noor Mohammad (Ex. Z-17) was recorded by Randive (PW 22) on August 19. As there was no gap of time between the statements of Kashinath and Bengali and the incident was only a few hours' old, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation, mens rea is an essential ingredient. It was held that the offences under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 were not of serious nature. It was held that mens rea was not an essential ingredient for proving the commission of offences. In Director of Enforcement v. M.C.T.M. Corpn. (P) Ltd. [(1996) 2 SCC 471 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 344] a two-Judge Bench was to consider whether mens rea is an essential ingredient in the proceedings taken under Section 23(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. It was held that mens rea is not an essential ingredient to establish contravention under Sections 10(1) and 23(1)(a) of that Act. It is not necessary in this case to broach further whether mens rea is an essential ingredient for proving the commis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
