2008 (12) TMI 425

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 20,000/-. He preferred an appeal. In appeal, conviction was confirmed but substantive sentence was modified as rigorous imprisonment for three months. Hence this revision. 2. Heard both sides. 3. Following points arise for consideration :- I.        Whether conviction of the revision petitioner is legal and proper? II.       Whether sentence is excessive? 4. Perused records. 5. Point No. I. Case of the prosecution is that on 10-8-1991 revision petitioner who was then working abroad was coming to his native place from Bombay to Kasaragod in the bus belonging to Soudi Travels. On getting information that revision petitioner was carrying ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....revision petitioner. PW4 stated that as instructed by PW1, he ascertained the purity of the three gold biscuits and five gold coins and issued Ext. P1, certificate. According to PW1, he used touchstone method to ascertain the purity of the gold. PW3 is an attestor in Exts. P1 and P2 but he reused to support the prosecution. He however, admitted that he signed in Exts. P1 and P2 on 10-8-1991. It is his further case that he had seen three gold biscuits, five gold coins and a few electronic items in the customs office. PW6 who is the Assistant Chemical Examiner of the Cochin Customs House examined the gold biscuits and gold coins and certified its purity as per Ext. P13. It is also the case of the prosecution that revision petitioner filed app....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on petitioner was recorded on 11-8-1991, he, having been released on bail on 10-8-1991. Exts. P9 and P10 applications submitted by the revision petitioner after his arrest and release on bail. In Exts.P9 and P10 it is specially admitted that gold biscuits and gold coins were seized from him on 10-8-1991. I am not inclined to think that Exts. P3, P9 or P10 is the result coercion as contended by the learned counsel. Thus, the fact of seizure is proved by the prosecution. 8. Then the question is whether the gold seized is smuggled into the country. It is not disputed that revision petitioner was working abroad during that time and was on his way to his house. Revision petitioner was not able to prove that he was authorised to transport....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as inclined to reduce the substantive sentence to three months. Now the request of the learned counsel is to confine the substantive sentence to the period of detention undergone by the revision petitioner, according to the counsel, for nine days from 12-8-1991 to 21-8-1991. In Ext. P3, revision petitioner who was then aged 36 years stated that he has a family consisting of wife, two daughters and two sons to be looked after, he has studied only upto the first standard and that during that time, he was working as driver abroad on a salary of 700 rivals per month. Even according to the prosecution, revision petitioner was not able to write Malayalam properly. Therefore, I find no reason to reject the statement of the revision petitioner that....