Confiscation under the Gold Control Act extends to receptacles, while personal penalty may be reduced on the facts.

Gold found in contravention of the Gold Control Act, 1968 was treated as liable to confiscation, and section 71 was read to extend confiscation to the package, covering or receptacle in which the gold was found. On that basis, confiscation of the seized gold and ornaments was upheld. The redemption fine was also maintained as not excessive in light of the quantity involved. However, the personal penalty was reduced because the extent of the appellant's involvement justified limited interference. The appeal therefore succeeded only to the extent of reducing the personal penalty, while confiscation and redemption fine were sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether the confiscation of the seized gold and ornaments was lawful under the Gold Control Act, 1968, including the applicability of confiscation to the package, covering or receptacle in which the gold was found; and (ii) whether the redemption fine and personal penalty required interference.

Issue (i): whether the confiscation of the seized gold and ornaments was lawful under the Gold Control Act, 1968, including the applicability of confiscation to the package, covering or receptacle in which the gold was found.

Analysis: The seized gold was found during search in circumstances attracting the prohibitory provisions of the Gold Control Act, 1968. Section 71 authorises confiscation not only of gold found in contravention of the Act but also of any package, covering or receptacle in which such gold is found. In view of this statutory scheme, the confiscation of the primary gold and the ornaments could not be assailed on the facts accepted in the order.

Conclusion: The confiscation was upheld and no interference was called for on this issue.

Issue (ii): whether the redemption fine and personal penalty required interference.

Analysis: The redemption fine was considered with reference to the quantity of contraband gold and ornaments and was not found excessive. As regards the personal penalty, the extent of the appellant's involvement warranted some reduction.

Conclusion: The redemption fine was maintained, while the personal penalty was reduced.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the limited extent of reducing the personal penalty, while the confiscation and redemption fine were sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Where gold is found in contravention of the Gold Control Act, confiscation extends to the gold as well as the package, covering or receptacle in which it is found, and appellate interference with penalty is justified only to the extent warranted by the facts.

---