2015 (4) TMI 1076 - HC - Customs

High Court affirms acquittal in silver smuggling case due to insufficient evidence

The High Court upheld the trial Court's acquittal of the accused in a contraband silver smuggling case. The prosecution's evidence, including statements ... Validity of acquittal order - Recovered 3 gold bars in raid - Also statements of the respondents also recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Held that:- at the time of passing the impugned judgment, learned trial Judge has given categorical finding that there are some contradictions in the evidence as regards the packing of the sample. It is also found that from the report it cannot be said that it is of the sample taken in the present case and even the panch witness is also not supporting the case of the prosecution. Therefore, the learned trial Judge has rightly observed that from the evidence on record it could not be proved that offence as alleged against the respondents-accused could not be established. Therefore, the learned Judge has rightly observed that the prosecution could not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and rightly acquitted the accused of the charges levelled against them. - Decided against the appellant Issues:Appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of CrPC, Charges under Customs Act and IPC, Contraband silver smuggling, Evidence and material on record, Statements recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act, Contradictions in evidence, Panch witness testimony, Appellate Court's power in acquittal appeals.Analysis:1. The Assistant Collector of Customs filed an appeal under Section 378 of CrPC against the acquittal of accused in a case involving smuggling of contraband silver. The accused faced charges under Section 135(b)(i) of the Customs Act read with Sections 120B and 120A of the IPC for bringing silver clandestinely.2. The prosecution alleged that the accused were caught with gold biscuits after a raid near Swami Narayan Temple. Statements of accused 1 and 2 were recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, but accused 3 escaped. The trial Court acquitted the accused, leading to the appeal.3. The appellant argued that the trial Court's acquittal was against the evidence and law, emphasizing the importance of the statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act in proving the accused's guilt. The appellant highlighted minor contradictions in the evidence and the absence of the recording officer as reasons for conviction.4. The respondents' counsel contended that the trial Court rightly acquitted the accused, citing lack of evidence connecting the accused to the contraband silver and absence of any incriminating material found with accused 3.5. The High Court judge analyzed the evidence and trial Court's findings. The judge noted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, citing contradictions in evidence and lack of support from the panch witness. The judge agreed with the trial Court's reasoning for acquittal.6. Referring to the settled legal position, the judge stated that in an appeal against acquittal, the Appellate Court need not rewrite the judgment unless there is perversity in the trial Court's decision. The judge found no reason to interfere with the trial Court's findings and upheld the acquittal.7. Citing a recent Supreme Court decision, the judge reiterated the principles governing the Appellate Court's power in acquittal appeals. The judge concluded that the trial Court's decision was justified, and there was no illegality or infirmity in the acquittal order.8. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeal, confirming the trial Court's acquittal of the respondents-accused. The judgment and order of acquittal were upheld, and any bail granted was canceled, with instructions to return the record and proceedings to the trial Court.