1981 (1) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ef Presidency Magistrate 19th Court Esplanade, Bombay for an offence under Clause (a) read with Clause (i) of Section 135 of the Customs Act, another under Clause (b) read with Clause (i) of that section and still another under Rule 126(H)(IA) read with Rule 126P(ii) and (iv) of the Defence of India Rules. He was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rupees 20,000/- and in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....traband gold recovered from the respondent (which amounted to 2015 tolas) has been confiscated by the Customs Authorities. (b) By the time the High Court pronounced its judgment after remand, the respondent had been facing criminal litigation for a period of 7 years which resulted in a lot of monetary expense and metal agony on his part. (c) The respondent had already been behind the bars fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rcumstances in which the offence was committed may be a third important consideration. None of these factors, as appearing in the present case, goes to help the respondent. The respondent was not an immature youth at the time of the commission of the 3 offences brought home to him, being no less than 24 years of age. The offence committed by him, already pointed out, involved possession of no less....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... do we find that there was any material whatsoever on the record to justify the observation by the High Court that the respondent was not in a position to pay any fine. 5. In this view of the matter, we think that resource to Section 4 of the Act was not at all called for, the time-lag between the commencement of the trial and the pronouncement of the impugned judgment notwithstanding. Conseque....