TMI Blog2002 (4) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... etitioner under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act. 2.I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and have been taken through the record. 3.Facts in brief are that on 30th August, 1986 officers of the Customs Preventive Branch, Customs Collectorate, New Delhi intercepted one truck No. DEL - 1885 near Punjab Sind Bank at Roshanara Road, Delhi; Harjeet Singh was the Driver and Nishan Sin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and that he did not know to whom the gold was to be delivered in Delhi. The driver and the cleaner were held guilty by judgment and order dated 31st October, 1987 under Section 135(1)(b) of Customs Act and were sentenced to undergo RI for one year and three months and to pay a fine of rupees ten thousand each; under Section 85 of the Gold (Control) Act and were sentenced to undergo RI for two mon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f justice; there is no iota of evidence against the petitioner; trial court did not apply its mind; statement of Nishan Singh, Surender Nath and Trilok Singh made before the Customs authorites could not be acted upon as they were not admissible in evidence, therefore, the order of framing of charge should be quashed. In support of his submissions, learned Counsel placed reliance on the observation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k No. DEL-1885; from a secret cavity in this truck 27.17 kgs. of gold worth more than Rs. 57.0 lakhs was recovered; the driver and the cleaner in these statement recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act named the petitioner; and after the seizure petitioner absconded. All these circumstances show, prima facie, case was framing of the charge. At the stage of framing for charge, evidence is not req ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
