Conveyance confiscation requires proof of knowledge or connivance before a transporter can face penalty for contraband carriage.

Conveyance confiscation under Customs law depends on proof that the owner or agent had knowledge of, or connived in, the transport of smuggled goods. Where the record and the driver's statement do not establish such knowledge or connivance, the statutory basis for confiscating the truck and imposing a personal penalty on the transporter is not satisfied. The analysis emphasises that mere carriage of contraband goods is insufficient by itself; the required mental element must be shown before liability under the confiscation and penalty provisions can be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether confiscation of the truck and the penalty imposed on the transporter were sustainable in the absence of evidence that the owner or driver had knowledge or connivance in the transportation of contraband goods.

Analysis: Section 115(2) of the Customs Act makes a conveyance liable to confiscation when used in smuggling or carriage of smuggled goods, but the owner can avoid confiscation by proving that the use was without the knowledge or connivance of the owner or his agent. The statement of the driver and the record did not establish that the transporter or its driver knew that the goods being carried were contraband. In the absence of such evidence, the statutory requirement for fastening confiscation and personal penalty was not met.

Conclusion: The confiscation and personal penalty were not sustainable and the appeal was allowed in favour of the appellant.

---