TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1990 (3) TMI 80
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....against Accused Nos. 6, 11, 12, 13, 17 and 18 was dismissed summarily and only leave was granted to appeal against the order of acquittal of Accused No. 16 who is the present Respondent No. 5 and the same was admitted. 2. Briefly stated facts giving rise to the present appeal are as under :- Original Accused Nos. 3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23 and 25 alongwith other known and unknown persons were alleged to be parties to the criminal conspiracy at Bombay, Dubai and other places and the object of the said conspiracy was to smuggle textiles and other articles of foreign origin into India and to evade duty chargeable on the said goods and to contravene the prohibition imposed on import of such goods into India. The prose....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es; that thereafter the godown was opened by the officers of the Central Excise and Marine Preventive Division and it was found to contain large number of gunny covered heavy packages; that the said packages thereafter were removed in the presence of panchas and Accused No. 19 to Customs godown; that on examination of the said goods it was found that there were about 60 packages having foreign textiles, record players, playing cards, nylon etc. of foreign origin and the total import value of the same was Rs. 2,43,642/- and the market value of the same in India was Rs. 7,30,927/-; that the said goods were seized under panchanama by the officers;' that on the same day at about 4.30 p.m. Police Constable Satam attached to V.P. Road Police Stat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....river; that the said truck was also searched when it was found parked and on the truck 10 packages containing foreign textiles of the import value of Rs. 1,25,565/-were found and the same were seized under panchanama. In view of the said allegations, all the Accused were charged under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code r/w Section 135 of the Customs Act and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and Accused Nos. 3, 5, 6,10, 11,12, 13,16,17,18,19 were further charged under Section 135(1) (a) r/w 135(1) (i) of the Customs Act in respect of goods seized under the panchanama and they were also charged under Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 for having contravened Section 3 of the Imports and Exports ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....om where the smuggled goods were found was rented out to Accused No. 17 and 18 at the instance of Accused No. 16. 4. The Trial Court has considered the evidence led by the prosecution in respect of Accused No. 16 in para 22 of the judgment. The allegation against Accused No. 16 was that after the raid and seizure of smuggled goods from the godown at Bhuleshwar Road, Accused No. 16 had directed and piloted the taxi and the truck with a view to see that they did not approach the godown, but the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate did not find the evidence in this respect Cogent and consistent. Nothing could be pointed out to show that the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was in error to conclude accordingly. Ex....