Possession of primary gold without authority sustained conviction, with deterrent imprisonment upheld for a serious economic offence.

Possession of primary gold without licence or lawful authority was held to attract the prohibitory and penal provisions of the Gold (Control) Act, where the recovery was direct from the accused's suitcase and supported by prompt seizure proceedings and consistent witness evidence. The accused's statement, recorded with translation assistance, was treated as voluntary, and the absence of the alleged supplier did not weaken the prosecution because possession was proved independently. The conviction under the Gold (Control) Act and the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment were upheld, with the court treating gold smuggling as a serious economic offence requiring deterrent punishment.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction under the Gold (Control) Act and the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment were sustainable on the evidence on record.

Analysis: The gold bars were recovered from the revision petitioner's suitcase in the presence of official witnesses and the seizure was promptly followed by registration of the case and further proceedings. The evidence of the prosecution witnesses was found free from material contradiction or discrepancy. The petitioner's statement was recorded with translation assistance and was treated as voluntary, with no reliable material showing coercion or force. Non-examination of the alleged supplier of the gold did not weaken the prosecution case because the recovery was direct from the petitioner. The Court also held that possession of primary gold without licence or lawful authority squarely attracted the prohibitory and penal provisions of the Gold (Control) Act. On sentence, the Court treated gold smuggling as a serious economic offence warranting deterrent punishment.

Conclusion: The conviction under Section 8(1)(i) read with Section 85(1) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968, and the sentence of six months' rigorous imprisonment were upheld as lawful and justified.

---