TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1986 (11) TMI 65
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respondent/accused was tried for the offence stated above along with other accused and he was ordered to be convicted for offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 and in default of payment of fine it was further ordered that he should undergo R.I. for six months more. This judgment of conviction and sentence was passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar on October 7, 1978. 2. The respondent/accused filed Criminal Appeal No.81979 in the Sessions Court at Jamnagar. Before the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar the accused did not challenge the judgment and order of conviction and requested for grant of probation under the provisions of Pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of Section 135." The aforesaid provision has been inserted in the Customs Act, 1962 by Act No.36 of 1973. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that when the appeal was decided by the learned Sessions Judge, the aforesaid provision had already come into force. In fact, it appears that the aforesaid provision has come into force with effect from September 3, 1973. The case against the respondent/accused was instituted sometime in the year 1974. He has been convicted by the trial Court, that is, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamnagar on October 7, 1978. Therefore, when he was convicted, the aforesaid provision was very much in force. In view of this position of law, the respondent/accu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er. But there appears to be reasonable grounds for delay in hearing the matter. Another matter, that is, Criminal Appeal No. 1297/1983 which arose out of the same incident and in which other accused were ordered to be acquitted by the trial court were involved, was tagged on with this matter. Simply because the Court could not hear and dispose of the matter immediately, the accused cannot urge that he be given the benefit of delay in disposal of the matter. It is an unfortunate thing that delay takes place in disposal of criminal matters. But where the accused is held guilty of the offence which affects the national economy and which eats into the vitals of the national economy, no lenient view whatsoever can be taken on the ground of delay....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., J.) held that the mere fact that the accused was a widow and a poor carrier does not entitle her to an excessively lenient treatment. It is stating the obvious to say that but for the readiness of carriers like the accused to help them, the big smugglers cannot carry on their nefarious activities which endanger the economic health and well being of the Nation. To take a lenient view in such matters is to give a charter to the smugglers to carry on their activities by engaging widows, women or poor persons as carriers. All that the smuggler has to do is to go on engaging such persons who can invoke the sympathy of the Court by their plight and to carry on the activities of smuggling with impunity with a twinkle of amusement in his eyes. If....