https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221938 At the stage of framing charge, the court does not meticulously assess the truth or evidentiary weight of prosecution material; a strong suspicion based on the record is sufficient to proceed to trial. Statements recorded by Customs Officers under Section 108 of the Customs Act are admissible, subject to scrutiny of voluntariness and any vitiating circumstance under the Evidence Act, and mere retraction does not by itself render them unusable. The admissibility of a co-accused statement under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act and the value of an independent person's statement could not be finally determined at that stage. Discharge was therefore refused and the charge order was upheld. en-us Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 May 2015 14:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221938 At the stage of framing charge, the court does not meticulously assess the truth or evidentiary weight of prosecution material; a strong suspicion based on the record is sufficient to proceed to trial. Statements recorded by Customs Officers under Section 108 of the Customs Act are admissible, subject to scrutiny of voluntariness and any vitiating circumstance under the Evidence Act, and mere retraction does not by itself render them unusable. The admissibility of a co-accused statement under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act and the value of an independent person's statement could not be finally determined at that stage. Discharge was therefore refused and the charge order was upheld. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 02 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221938