Export attempt requires physical movement toward departure; mere preparation and provisional release against bond defeat confiscation and penalty.

An export attempt is complete only when the goods have entered actual physical movement towards leaving India; preparatory acts, including stationary possession of copra in a godown and an intercepted lorry still away from the border, remain preparation and do not amount to attempt. Where the goods had been provisionally released against bond, they were no longer available for confiscation, so confiscation with redemption fine was unsustainable and any penalty based on that confiscation also could not survive. The bond, rather than confiscation, was the proper enforcement route.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the facts disclosed an attempt to export copra to Nepal, or only a preparation; (ii) Whether confiscation and penalty could be sustained when the goods had been provisionally released against bond.

Issue (i): Whether the facts disclosed an attempt to export copra to Nepal, or only a preparation

Analysis: The distinction between attempt and preparation depends on whether the overt acts have reached the stage of direct physical movement towards export with the intention to take the goods out of India. Acts done anterior to actual movement remain preparatory. Since the copra found in the godown was not in the course of movement and the intercepted lorry was still at a distance from the border, the conduct had not crossed the threshold of attempt and the possibility of abandoning the venture could not be excluded.

Conclusion: The facts disclosed only preparation and not an attempt to export.

Issue (ii): Whether confiscation and penalty could be sustained when the goods had been provisionally released against bond

Analysis: Where the goods had already been provisionally released against bond, they were not available for confiscation in the hands of the adjudicating authority. In such a situation, the proper course was to proceed on the bond rather than impose confiscation with redemption fine. Penalty founded on the same unsustainable confiscation also could not survive.

Conclusion: The confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the impugned order was set aside, with consequential refund of amounts, if paid.

Ratio Decidendi: An export offence is complete only when the goods have entered the stage of actual physical movement towards taking them out of India; mere preparatory acts or stationary possession short of that stage do not constitute an attempt, and goods released provisionally against bond cannot ordinarily be confiscated as unavailable property.

---