Customs inquiry statements remain admissible where no improper inducement or threat is shown under the Evidence Act.

A statement recorded during a Customs inquiry under Sections 107 and 108 of the Customs Act was held admissible because the officer was not a police officer and the examinee was not yet in the character of an accused person until a complaint was filed before a Magistrate. Section 24 of the Evidence Act applies only to a confession by an accused induced by threat, inducement or promise from a person in authority. A warning that the inquiry was a judicial proceeding and that false evidence could attract prosecution merely reflected the duty to speak truthfully and did not amount to an improper threat. The statement was treated as voluntary and properly received in evidence.

---

---

Issues: Whether a statement made by an assessee to a Customs Officer during an inquiry under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 was inadmissible under Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 because the officer warned him that he must speak the truth and that false evidence could attract prosecution under the Indian Penal Code.

Analysis: A Customs Officer conducting an inquiry under Sections 107 and 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not a police officer, and a person examined in such inquiry does not stand in the character of an accused person until a complaint is filed before a competent Magistrate. Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 applies only where a confession is made by an accused person and is caused by inducement, threat or promise proceeding from a person in authority. The warning given by the Customs Officer that the inquiry was a judicial proceeding and that false evidence could attract penal consequences merely reflected the statutory obligation to speak the truth and did not amount to a threat within the meaning of Section 24. The finding that the statement was voluntary and that no improper inducement or threat was proved further supported admissibility.

Conclusion: Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 did not bar admission of the statement, and the confessional statement was properly received in evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: A statement recorded in a Customs inquiry under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not excluded by Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 unless it is made by a person already in the character of an accused and is shown to have been caused by a threat, inducement or promise emanating from a person in authority having reference to the charge.

---