9911796707
TMI Blog1971 (7) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tenced to nine months rigorous imprisonment by him on charges Nos. 51, 52, 54, 55, 57 and 58 which related to commission of offences under the aforesaid enactments and under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The Assistant Collector of Customs, Preventive Department, Bombay, filed a complaint, dated August 10, 1964, against 21 persons. Only 10 out of them were tried because the rest had absconded. The accused, who were tried, were Nos. (1) Gian Mahtani, (2) Gobindram Harjani, (3) Ramchand Motwani, 7, 8, 9, (10) Budhoo, (11) Mohamed Ismail B. Bashir, (12) Nazruddin and (13) Abdul Latif. The complaint was on charges under Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, read with Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. Accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were arraigned as the principal conspirators who were alleged to have smuggled large quantities of watches and luxury goods from Singapore to Bombay between August, 1963 and January 20, 1964. Accused Nos. 7 to 13 were charged as the carriers of these goods and who had arrived by the steamship S.S. Marconi at Bombay on January 20, 1964. The Trial Magistrate acquitted accused Nos. 1 and 2. Accused ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essional statement of A-1 which is Ext. Z. 70 in which he admitted the hatching of the conspiracy and the smuggling of luxury articles pursuant thereto. He has ascribed to himself a minor part and put the blame largely on A-2 and P.W. 1 Harjani. In all 66 charges were framed. Harjani was made the principal prosecution witness. The evidence on behalf of the prosecution considered of the testimony of Harjani, the cables which passed between the conspirators and the confession of A-1 which was retracted at the trial as also the deposition of Jagtiani and Vaswani (P.W. Nos. 2 and 10). 7. The trial Magistrate held that there was a conspiracy to smuggle luxury goods and watches on a large scale as alleged in the complaint filed by the Assistant Collector of Customs on August 10, 1964. He was of the view that A-1 was engaged in smuggling business during the period of the conspiracy. He, however, found that A-1 was involved in a separate business of smuggling which was independent of the conspiracy and, therefore, the conspiracy charge which had been framed against him had not been proved. He acquitted A-1 of all the charges but convicted the other accused as mentioned before. The High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowed that goods of a large value must have been smuggled. The cables by which A-1 is stated to have made a large provision for smuggling were relied upon and from those cables it was found established that goods worth at least Rs. 35,000/- had been smuggled into Bombay through the three carriers who arrived by `Roma'. The position with regard to the goods which came by the other ship `M.V. Asia' through Aziz and Herbert was similar. The reasoning of the High Court was that the carriers who had arrived by these two ships had admittedly smuggled contraband articles and since the version of A-1 that these goods consisted of Indian currency in specie was false it followed that A-1 must have smuggled into India through these carriers luxury goods and watches worth Rs. 35,000/- on January 3, 1964 and 20,000 Dollars on January 11, 1964, respectively. 9. As regards the goods which had arrived by `S.S. Marconi', the High Court found that the charges relating to them (63 to 66) related only to importing of goods otherwise than as bona fide personal baggage. It came to the conclusion that A-1 was interested in the cookers and other luxury articles which were sent by A-3 to A-1 with the tw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xury goods such as saris, electric goods, toiletaries, cosmetics, electric cookers, etc. The learned Trial Magistrate found that there was no evidence about the exact nature of the goods which had been smuggled through the carriers of A-1 who arrived by the ships `Roma' and `Asia'. The High Court also, as already noticed, observed that apart from the bare word of Harjani that these carriers brought luxury goods and watches, there was no other evidence relating to the nature of the goods brought by them. It does not appear that the High Court was prepared to rely on the sole evidence of Harjani nor indeed it is possible to do so particularly in the light of the findings of the Trial Magistrate and the High Court itself. The High Court was, however, swayed by the amount spent on the carriers and the cables which had passed between A-1 and his associates in Singapore. Reference was made inter alia to Ext. Q a cable sent by A-1 to A-3, Ext. T which was sent by A-1 to Mohan Nagrani, Ext. U a cable from A-3 to A-1, etc. Now these cables do relate to certain arrangements having been made about finances which were being arranged by A-1 for being utilized in Singapore and it was even admitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fide personal baggage. According to the High Court, A-1 was interested in the cookers and other luxury articles which had been sent by A-3 to him with the carriers Jagtiani and Vaswani who had delivered them to him. He had thus smuggled the goods in contravention of the prohibition under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The goods were liable to be confiscated under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 and thus offences under Section 135 of that Act had been committed. According to the High Court, the evidence which connected A-1 with the goods specified in those charges consisted of the deposition of Harjani, the confession of A-1 and the testimony of witnesses Jagtiani and Vaswani. The learned Trial Magistrate gave cogent and clear reasons for not placing any reliance on the statements of Harjani and of Jagtiani and Vaswani (P.Ws. 2 and 10). It may be mentioned that even according to the evidence of the latter all that they had done was that they had delivered two electric cookers and other articles to A-1. The duties on these articles had not found any objectionable or contraband articles like watches, etc., concealed in the electric cookers or the other packages that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
