Co-accused confession and joint trial requirements limit reliance at framing charge when no other evidence exists.

A statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act is admissible in evidence and may be considered at the stage of framing charge if otherwise proved and capable of supporting a prima facie view. However, a co-accused's confession can be used against another accused only within the limits of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, which requires a joint trial. Where the co-accused is not jointly tried, the confession cannot operate as substantive evidence against the petitioner for framing charge, and in the absence of other material no prima facie case survives. The charge orders were therefore set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether a statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, of a co-accused not jointly tried with the petitioner could be relied upon at the stage of framing charge under Section 135A of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: A statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act is admissible in evidence and is not hit by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, or Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India. Such a statement may be looked into at the stage of framing charge if it is otherwise proved and can support a prima facie view. However, a confession of a co-accused is admissible only within the scope of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and that provision requires a joint trial of the accused persons. Where the co-accused is not being tried jointly, the confession cannot be used as substantive evidence against the petitioner for framing charge, and in the absence of any other evidence no prima facie case survives.

Conclusion: The confession of the co-accused was not admissible against the petitioner because there was no joint trial, and the charge could not be sustained.

Final Conclusion: The orders framing charge were set aside and the petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: A confession of a co-accused can be used against another accused only when the requirements of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, are satisfied, including joint trial; otherwise, it cannot form the basis for framing charge.

---