https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45636 Mere presence in a vehicle carrying smuggled gold concealed in secret cavities did not establish conscious possession, knowledge of concealment, or participation in the offence. The evidence did not show that the respondents knew, or had reason to believe, that the gold was being transported illegally, and no incriminating articles were recovered from their persons or belongings. The statutory presumption under the Customs Act could not be invoked without proof of possession, and there was no reliable basis to treat one respondent as an aider or abettor. In an appeal against acquittal, interference was unwarranted because the trial court's view was not unreasonable, so the acquittal stood. en-us Mon, 27 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 13 Jul 2010 10:01:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45636 Mere presence in a vehicle carrying smuggled gold concealed in secret cavities did not establish conscious possession, knowledge of concealment, or participation in the offence. The evidence did not show that the respondents knew, or had reason to believe, that the gold was being transported illegally, and no incriminating articles were recovered from their persons or belongings. The statutory presumption under the Customs Act could not be invoked without proof of possession, and there was no reliable basis to treat one respondent as an aider or abettor. In an appeal against acquittal, interference was unwarranted because the trial court's view was not unreasonable, so the acquittal stood. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 27 Mar 1967 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45636