Section 108 Customs statement needs corroboration; bail granted where no recovery and investigation was complete.
A confessional statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 is admissible, but it cannot by itself sustain custody or establish guilt without independent corroboration. With no gold recovered from the applicant, and the case resting mainly on call-detail records, forensic material and the Section 108 statement, the Court found the corroborative link to the alleged offence weak. As investigation was complete, the complaint had been filed, and custodial interrogation was no longer necessary, the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses was treated as negligible. Bail was therefore granted, with personal liberty weighed in favour of release.
Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to bail in the customs prosecution, particularly in view of the recovery position, the call-detail and forensic material, and the evidentiary value of the statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Analysis: The material showed that no gold was recovered from the applicant's possession and the prosecution case against him rested substantially on telephonic contacts, forensic material and the statement recorded under Section 108. The statement under Section 108 is admissible, but admissibility is distinct from sufficiency for conviction, and a confessional statement cannot be accepted in isolation without independent corroboration. The Court found that the prosecution had not placed strong corroborative material showing that the conversations resulted in any transaction or were specifically linked to the alleged offence. It also noted that investigation was complete, the complaint had been filed, and custodial interrogation was no longer necessary. In those circumstances, the possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses was found to be negligible. The Court also took into account the applicant's incarceration, explained criminal history, the nature of the alleged offence and the constitutional mandate of personal liberty.
Conclusion: Bail was granted to the applicant.
Final Conclusion: The order recognises that a statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 may be relied upon only with proper corroboration, and that once investigation is complete and custody is no longer , personal liberty may prevail in a fit case for bail.
Ratio Decidendi: A confessional statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, though admissible, cannot by itself justify continued custody or conviction without independent corroboration, especially where investigation is complete and no recovery is made from the applicant.
TaxTMI 
AI Drafter ✕
TaxTMI 
