2011 (2) TMI 177 - HC - Customs

Conviction u/s 135 - Smuggled goods - It was also stated by him that the recovered gold biscuits were delivered to him by one Deesha, an associate of Amrik Singh, a day prior to the recovery, that is, March 5th, 1989 at his residence and the same was to be delivered to one Babbo on March 6th, 1989 at 11 a.m - There is no legal proposition that evidence of public officers, unless supported by independent witnesses, is unworthy of acceptance - If the evidence of the public officer is found acceptable, it would be an erroneous proposition that Court must reject the prosecution version solely on the ground that no independent witness was examined - There is no evidence that there was any previous enmity between the public officials concerned and the petitioner, who in fact, was a stranger or that they wanted him to implicate in a false case - the guilt was brought home to the accused beyond any shadow of doubt and conviction and the sentence as imposed by learned trial Judge do not suffer from any infirmity to warrant interference - The revision is dismissed

Summary

Issues:
Conviction under Section 135 of the Customs Act based on recovery of gold biscuits and currency notes from the petitioner's possession.

Analysis:
The judgment delivered by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana involved the revision against a conviction under Section 135 of the Customs Act. The petitioner was found guilty and sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.5000. The case originated from the recovery of 199 gold biscuits from an individual named Satnam Singh alias Bitta, leading to a raid at the house of the petitioner. During the raid, an amount of Rs.1,01,300 and 100 gold biscuits were recovered from the petitioner's residence. The recovered gold biscuits were linked to the petitioner through statements made by Charanjit Singh, implicating him in the smuggling operation. The Custom Department officials, including Kapil Sood and Kewal Krishan, testified to the recovery of the gold biscuits and currency notes from the petitioner's possession. Despite the defense's denial and claim of false implication, the court found the testimonies of the officials to be credible and consistent. The court emphasized that the absence of independent witnesses during the raid did not invalidate the evidence presented by the public officers. The court highlighted the presumption of honesty in the actions of public officials unless proven otherwise, and rejected the defense's argument of potential malice or conspiracy against the petitioner. The court concluded that the evidence presented by the prosecution established the guilt of the accused beyond any doubt, upholding the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial judge.

In response to the argument raised by the petitioner's counsel regarding the lack of independent witnesses during the recovery process, the court dismissed the significance of this argument. The court emphasized that the presence of independent witnesses, although not examined in court, did not diminish the credibility of the official witnesses' testimonies. The court clarified that the absence of independent witnesses did not invalidate the evidence presented by the public officers, and the court must scrutinize such evidence with greater care. The court highlighted that the quantity of gold recovered, 11,600 grams, made it implausible for the custom officers to plant such evidence. The court reiterated that the presumption of honesty in the actions of public officials should prevail unless proven otherwise, and the lack of enmity or motive against the petitioner further supported the reliability of the prosecution's case. Ultimately, the court upheld the conviction and dismissed the revision, ordering the petitioner's arrest to serve the remaining sentence as directed by the trial judge.