TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (7) TMI 132
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hannel. Upon being questioned about whether he had any dutiable items like gold etc. he responded in the negative. The X-ray screening of his hand bag did not indicate anything but the metal detector indicated presence of some objects on his person. After giving notice, he was searched in the presence of two witnesses. He was found wearing a specially designed bag of velvet cloth underneath his clothes. These contained seven gold bars of foreign origin of one kg. each. The contraband was valued at Rs. 31.5 lakhs and Rs. 41.67 lakhs. In addition, a visiting card bearing the name of 'Monica Sarees' was recovered. 3.During the course of investigations, the said accused Satpal Singh recorded a statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as business. The masjor India Kuala Lumpur. I first came to know him when he hired my van. I used to drive the van myself at that time he used to come acess …. and knew that I was not making enough money. About two years back, he suggested that if I carry gold for him, he would given me good money and I agreed. Whenever he wanted to send the gold to India, he used to call me at his office in Kuala Lumpur in the name of S.M. Mohammad and gave the gold to me along with enough money to buy air ticket and to carry my expenses. I used to buy the ticket of my own and informed Abdul Mohammad about the date and time of the flight. This time also, Abdul Mohammad give me gold on 16-7-97 and gave me money to buy air ticket on 17-7-97 by SQ 45/SQ 408....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f seeking assurance in support of its conclusion deducible from it. He also relied upon the judgment of this Court in Om Prakash Baksh v. State - 1989 Crl. L.J. 1207. 6.Learned counsel urged that the only material to establish a link between the present petitioner and a co-accused was the allegedly recovered visiting card. That objective material apart from the inadmissible statement if taken together could establish nothing. In these circumstances, requiring the petitioner to stand trial would not only be a futile exercise but may put him to the rigours of an avoidable proceeding. 7.Mr. Satish Aggarwal, learned Counsel contended that the Court while framing the charges was alive to all the materials. It carefully weighed the argument....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... submitted that the co-accused was absconding and not appearing in the trial. 9.It is no doubt true that in Haricharan Kurmi's case the Supreme Court held that a confession should be taken into consideration if it is for the purpose of reassuring that the other materials indicate guilt of the accuse. Yet, in a later decision, of a Constitution Bench, i.e. Illias v. Collector of Customs - 1983 (13) E.L.T. 1427 (S.C.) = AIR 1970 SC 1065 the Supreme Court held that Customs authorities have been invested under the Act with many powers of a police officer in matters relating to arrest, investigation and search, which the Customs Officers did not have under the Sea Customs Act. Even though the Customs Officers have been invested with many of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he "Customs Authorities served notices upon various suspects and recorded their statements in answer to these notices. The statements of Kashinath (Ex. A) and Bengali (Ex. Z-27) were recorded on the 15th, the former by Karnik (PW 24) and the latter by Rane (PW 26). These statements were recorded simultaneously or almost simultaneously. The statement of Noor Mohammad (Ex. Z-17) was recorded by Randive (PW 22) on August 19. As there was no gap of time between the statements of Kashinath and Bengali and the incident was only a few hours' old, it is impossible that the officers could have tutored them to make statements which agree in so many details". On consideration of the evidence it was held that - "although Noor Mohammad's statement....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r proving the commission of offences. In Director of Enforcement v. M.C.T.M. Corpn. (P) Ltd. [(1996) 2 SCC 471 : 1996 SCC (Cri) 344] a two-Judge Bench was to consider whether mens rea is an essential ingredient in the proceedings taken under Section 23(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. It was held that mens rea is not an essential ingredient to establish contravention under Sections 10(1) and 23(1)(a) of that Act. It is not necessary in this case to broach further whether mens rea is an essential ingredient for proving the commission of the offence under Section 135 of the Act or Sections 85 and 86 of the Gold (Control) Act since none has raised such contention. What is required to be considered is whether voluntary statement, E....