Customs officer statements remain admissible with recovery evidence, and delay may justify reduced sentence in concealment cases.

A statement made before a Customs Officer is treated as admissible and is not barred by Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, because Customs Act enquiries are not governed by the same rule as police investigations. Where corroborated by recovery of a large quantity of silver from vehicles and nearby premises, such a statement may support an inference of involvement in concealment and possession of prohibited goods. The text also notes that prolonged pendency can be considered in mitigation at the sentencing stage, leading to reduction of the substantive sentence while the finding of guilt remains intact.

---

---

Issues: Whether the conviction for concealment and possession of silver under the Customs law was sustainable on the basis of the recovery and the statement made before the Customs Officer, and whether the substantive sentence required reduction.

Analysis: The recovery of a large quantity of silver from the vehicles and nearby premises, together with the statement recorded by the Customs Officer, was treated as sufficient to establish the petitioner's involvement. A statement made before a Customs Officer was held not to be barred by Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, because proceedings under the Customs Act are not governed by the same rule applicable to police investigations. The circumstances also supported the inference of culpable involvement in dealing with prohibited goods. On sentence, the prolonged pendency of the proceedings was taken into account as a mitigating factor.

Conclusion: The conviction was upheld, but the substantive sentence was reduced to one year.

Final Conclusion: The revision succeeded only to the limited extent of sentence reduction while the finding of guilt remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: A confession or statement made to a Customs Officer during enquiry is not excluded by Section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, and may be relied upon with corroborating recovery evidence to sustain conviction under the Customs Act.

---