https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42185 Statutory presumptions of culpable mental state under the customs and narcotics framework are rebuttable, but they were not displaced for accused 1 and 2 where the evidence showed procurement, packing, concealment and attempted export of ganja, and the enquiry material under Section 108 of the Customs Act was treated as admissible and reliable. Their objections based on Section 25 of the Evidence Act and Article 20(3) of the Constitution failed, so the convictions were upheld. As to accused 3, the evidence did not prove knowledge of the concealed ganja or collusion, and his role was limited to signing clearance papers; the acquittal was therefore sustained. The sentence on accused 1 and 2 was found proportionate and left undisturbed. en-us Mon, 29 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Jun 2010 16:48:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42185 Statutory presumptions of culpable mental state under the customs and narcotics framework are rebuttable, but they were not displaced for accused 1 and 2 where the evidence showed procurement, packing, concealment and attempted export of ganja, and the enquiry material under Section 108 of the Customs Act was treated as admissible and reliable. Their objections based on Section 25 of the Evidence Act and Article 20(3) of the Constitution failed, so the convictions were upheld. As to accused 3, the evidence did not prove knowledge of the concealed ganja or collusion, and his role was limited to signing clearance papers; the acquittal was therefore sustained. The sentence on accused 1 and 2 was found proportionate and left undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 29 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42185