2015 (4) TMI 1185 - HC - Customs

Smuggling - Gold - it is alleged that the accused were in one way or the other involved in bringing illegally foreign make gold, kept it in their custody, aided in transportation of the same and thus, helped each other willingly - Held that - There are no evidences against accused - Babu Madhu Tandel. Despite the fact that the authorities came to know that Babu Madhu Tandel was involved, no statement qua him was taken. The learned Judge therefore, has rightly acquitted the accused - Babu Madhu Tandel and it cannot be said that there was any conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. There is no conspiracy and therefore, on the touchstone of the decisions of the Apex Court, the learned Judge has rightly not believed that offences under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code were committed. Hence, Criminal Appeal No. 767/1993 stands dismissed. From the Boat which was detained, it cannot be said that Babu Madhu Tandel was in the deep seas but in fact, it was in the jetty. Thus, the learned Judge had held against the appellant. I do not find that on the touchstone of the decisions of the Apex Court, this Court can interfere with the well-reasoned judgment and order of the Trial Court. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Issues:
1. Appeal against judgment and order of acquittal under various sections.
2. Allegations of illegal gold smuggling and conspiracy.
3. Grant of sanction for prosecution under relevant laws.
4. Examination of witnesses and evidences.
5. Legal arguments for interference by the High Court.
6. Prosecution's submission for no interference required.
7. Application of Sections 120B and 135 of the Indian Penal Code and Customs Act.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, Assistant Collector of Customs, challenged the acquittal order of the accused under Sections 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, Section 85 of the Gold Control Act, and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The case involved illegal smuggling of gold through a complex operation involving multiple accused and transactions.

2. The prosecution alleged that the accused were knowingly involved in misdeclaration, evasion of duty, and illegal possession of gold, violating various provisions of the Customs Act and Gold Control Act. The accused were accused of aiding in transportation, concealment, and distribution of the smuggled gold, forming a conspiracy to commit the offenses.

3. The High Court analyzed the grant of sanction for prosecution by the Collector of Customs. The defense argued that the Collector had perused the investigation papers before granting sanction. However, the defense contended that the Collector lacked authority to grant sanction under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, which was not mentioned in the sanction order. The defense sought High Court's interference based on these grounds.

4. The prosecution presented witnesses and documentary evidence to support the charges against the accused. The Trial Court examined the evidence and acquitted the accused based on lack of concrete evidence against them, especially one of the accused who had been unserved for 22 years.

5. The defense argued that the Trial Court erred in acquitting the accused and sought the High Court's intervention to overturn the judgment. The defense highlighted discrepancies in the Trial Court's reasoning and emphasized the need for a review based on legal provisions and evidence presented during the trial.

6. The prosecution opposed the appeal, stating that the Trial Court's judgment was well-reasoned and did not warrant any interference by the High Court. The prosecution maintained that the evidence and legal arguments were adequately considered by the Trial Court in reaching the decision to acquit the accused.

7. The High Court referred to relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and Customs Act, specifically Section 120B and Section 135, to assess the legality of the accused's actions. The Court examined the conspiracy charges and evasion of duty allegations under these sections while evaluating the Trial Court's decision to acquit the accused based on the evidence and legal principles applied.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed both appeals, finding them devoid of merit and upholding the Trial Court's acquittal order. The Court canceled any existing bail and bail bonds, directing the transfer of records to the Trial Court promptly.

← Previous Next →