Admissibility of customs statements upheld where corroborated by strong circumstantial evidence of illicit gold transport.

A customs officer's recorded statement was held admissible and reliable where corroborated by strong circumstantial evidence. The appellant was intercepted in a car at an odd hour with foreign-marked gold, the engine running, and the occupants' conduct indicating coordinated activity; the absence of any explanation further supported guilt. Objections that parts of the statement were inserted by officers, that the use of "we" was improbable, and that another officer was not examined were rejected. The conviction and sentence for customs and foreign exchange offences were upheld, and the appeal failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under the customs and foreign exchange laws was sustainable on the basis of the recorded statement and surrounding circumstances.

Analysis: The appellant was found in a car from which a large quantity of foreign-marked gold was recovered at an odd hour, with the engine running and the conduct of the occupants suggesting coordinated activity. The statement recorded by the customs officer was found to be admissible and reliable; the objections that parts of it were inserted by officers, that the use of "we" was improbable, and that another officer was not examined were rejected. The surrounding facts, including the recovery, the conduct at interception, and the absence of any explanation, furnished strong corroboration of the statement.

Conclusion: The conviction and sentence were upheld.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed and the findings of guilt on the customs and foreign exchange counts were maintained.

Ratio Decidendi: A customs officer's recorded statement is admissible, and where it is corroborated by compelling circumstantial evidence, it can validly sustain a conviction for offences involving illicit possession and attempted transport of contraband goods.

---