2023 (5) TMI 401 - HC - Customs

Court Rejects Govt's Bid for Tougher Sentence in Gold Smuggling Case; Criticizes Poor Petition Drafting, Imposes Costs.

Union of India represented by Daso Modoli Assistant Commissioner, Customs Division, P.O. Imphal, Manipur Versus Sabir Ahamad, Rafijuddin

Union of India represented by Daso Modoli Assistant Commissioner, Customs Division, P.O. Imphal, Manipur Versus Sabir Ahamad, Rafijuddin - 2023 (385) ... Issues Involved:The issues involved in the judgment are the revision petition filed for enhancement of sentence under the Customs Act, 1962 and Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C), the condonation of delay in filing the revision, the imposition of a lenient sentence by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM), Chandel, and the maintainability of the revision petition.Revision Petition for Enhancement of Sentence:The Union of India filed a revision petition seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on the respondents under Section 135(1)(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondents were convicted for possession of 14 gold biscuits of foreign origin. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chandel, sentenced the respondents to imprisonment till the rising of the Court, a fine of Rs. 10,000 each, and 15 days of imprisonment in default of fine payment. The convicts deposited the fine. The main ground for revision was that the sentence was too lenient and would set a bad precedent.Condonation of Delay and Lack of Appearance:The High Court condoned a delay of 98 days in filing the revision petition. Despite due service, none of the respondents appeared during the consideration of the application for condonation of delay or in the main petition.Imposition of Lenient Sentence:The revision petition argued that the sentence imposed by the CJM, Chandel, was too lenient and did not consider all facts and circumstances of the case. However, the Court noted that the leniency was based on the suggestion of the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) for Customs. The Court directed the petitioner to provide information on whether the SPP was instructed to make such a suggestion and if any action was initiated against him.Maintainability of Revision Petition:The Court highlighted discrepancies in the filing of the revision petition under repealed sections of the Customs Act, which were no longer in force at the time of filing. The Court found a lack of application of mind in filing the petition and dismissed it with costs for being frivolous. The Union of India was criticized for the poor drafting of the petition and failing to adhere to the correct legal provisions.Dismissal of Revision Petition:After considering all facts and the additional affidavit, the Court found no error in the sentence passed by the CJM, Chandel. The Court declined to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the revision petition with a cost of Rs. 10,000 for wasting the Court's time and public money. The cost was to be deposited with the High Court Legal Services Committee within one month. The Court expressed displeasure at the manner in which the appeal/revision was filed by the Union of India and emphasized the importance of filing under the correct legal provisions.Notification to Customs Division:A copy of the order was directed to be sent to the Assistant Commissioner, Customs Division, Imphal for information and necessary compliance.