TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (5) TMI 147
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, and the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. There is difference of opinion between the High Courts on this issue, the Delhi High Court in the judgment (reported as K. T. Advani v. State [1985] Crl. LJ 1325) under challenge in Criminal Appeal No. 476 of 1986 holding against the Revenue, and the Madras High Court taking the opposite view in its judgment impugned in Criminal Appeals Nos. 301-302 of 1987. The main argument has been addressed by Mr. Salve with reference to the facts in Criminal Appeals Nos. 301 and 302 of 1987, arising out of a matter under the Customs Act, 1962. Mr. U. R. Lalit, counsel in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 717 of 1991, has adopted his contentions and supported the same by additional grounds. The Enforcement Directorate, Delhi Zone, investigating the matter under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, has filed Criminal Appeal No. 476 of 1986 against the judgment of the Delhi High Court allowing the applications under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, of the respondents, who are represented before us by Mr. Panjwani. Mr. Salve referred to the provisions of Chapter XIII and Chapter XIV of the Customs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....swer in view of the protection under article 20(3). It is submitted that to deny him this privilege is to deny him a constitutional right. We do not find any merit in this argument in view of the decisions of this court referred to above. Clause (3) of article 20 declares that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. It does not refer to a hypothetical person who may in future be discovered to have been guilty of some offence. In Ramesh Chandra Mehta's case [1969] 2 SCR 461 ; AIR 1970 SC 940, the appellant was searched at the Calcutta airport and diamonds and jewellery of substantial value were found on his person as also currency notes in a suitcase with him, and in pursuance of a statement made by him more pearls and jewellery were recovered from different places. He was charged with offences under the Sea Customs Act. During the trial, reliance was placed on his confessional statements made before the Customs Authorities, which was objected to on the ground that the same were inadmissible in evidence inter alia, in view of the provisions of article 20(3). While rejecting the objection, the Supreme Court held that in order that the g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... took cognizance of the offence and issued summons for appearance against the appellant. It was contended unsuccess fully that the charge was unsustainable in view of the protection under article 20(3) of the Constitution and the immunity under section 161(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code! In this background, the observations relied upon by Mr. Salve and Mr. Lalit were made and they cannot be treated to have in any way diluted the ratio in Ramesh Chandra Mehta's case [1969] 2 SCR 461. The question whether customs officials are police officers, and whether the statements recorded by the customs authorities under sections 107 and 108 of the Customs Act were inadmissible in evidence were examined in Illias v. Collector of Customs [1969] 2 SCR 613 and answered in the negative by a Bench of five judges and there is, therefore, no use in referring to the observations made in the judgment in a regular criminalcase initiated by the police. Reference was also made to the Constitution Bench decision in Ramanlal Bhogilal Shah v, D. K. Guha [1973] 1 SCC 696. The appellant, Ramanlal, was arrested on August 31, 1971, under section 19B of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, and the gro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as near custodial interrogation, and if the same is continued for a long period it may amount to mental third degree. It was submitted by both Mr. Salve and Mr. Lalit that the present issue should be resolved only by applying the "just, fair and reasonable test", and Mr. Lalit further added that the point has to be decided in the light of the facts and circumstances obtaining in a particular case and a general rule should not be laid down one way or the other. Mr. Salve urged that when a person is called by the customs authorities to their office or to any place away from his house, and is subjected to intensive interrogation without the presence of somebody who can aid and advise him, he is bound to get upset, which by itself amounts to loss of liberty. Reference was made by learned counsel to the minority view in In re, Groban (352 US 330, 1 L Ed; 2d 376) declaring that it violates the protection guaranteed by the Constitution for the State to compel a person to appear alone before any law enforcement officer and give testimony in secret against his will. We are afraid the judgment of the United States Supreme Court in In re, Groban (352. US 330 ; 1 L Ed. 2d 376) is of no as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rogation or worse until the groundwork has been secretly laid for their inevitable conviction. While the labels applied to this practice have frequently changed, the central idea wherever and whenever carried out remains unchanging-extraction of 'statements' by one means or another from an individual by officers of the state while he is held incommunicado." The learned judge, accordingly expressed his dissent, observing that to compel a person to answer questions at a secret interrogation where he is denied legal assistance and where he is subject to the uncontrolled and invisible exercise of power by government officials, would be unconstitutional. We do not share the apprehension as expressed above in the minority judgment in connection with enquiry and investigation under the Customs Act and other similar statutes of our country. There is no question of whisking away the persons concerned in the cases before us for secret interrogation, and there is no reason for us to impute the motive of preparing the groundwork of false cases for securing conviction of innocent persons, to the officers of the State duly engaged in performing their duty of prevention and detection of econom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h pursuits. But that cannot be a ground for holding that he has a constitutional right to claim similar luxuries and company of his choice. Mr. Salve was fair enough not to pursue his argument with reference to the comfort part, but continued to maintain that the appellant is entitled to the company of his choice during the questioning. The purpose of the enquiry under the Customs Act and the other similar statutes will be completely frustrated if the whims of the persons in possession of useful information for the departments are allowed to prevail. For achieving the object of such an enquiry if the appropriate authorities be of the view that such persons should be dissociated from the atmosphere and the company of persons who provide encouragement to them in adopting a non-co-operative attitude to the machinery of law, there cannot be any legitimate objection to depriving them of such company. The relevant provisions of the Constitution in this regard have to be construed in the spirit in which they were made and the benefits thereunder should not be expanded" to favour exploiters engaged in tax evasion at the cost of the public exchequer. Applying the "just, fair and reasonable ....