2017 (10) TMI 670 - AT - Customs

Smuggling - assorted Foreign currencies - Baggage Rules - Held that - appellant has not come out with clean hands to prove his innocence except technically challenging veracity of the statements recorded without dissociating himself from the smuggling racket and a carrier of foreign currency. He was also arrested for such smuggling and produced before the Magistrate Court - there is no necessity to interfere with the adjudication for which that is upheld - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appellant found with foreign currency at Mumbai Airport.
2. Allegations of being part of a smuggling racket.
3. Evidence of possession of foreign currency.
4. Challenge to prove innocence and source of possession.

Analysis:
The appellant, a carrier of foreign currency, was apprehended at Mumbai Airport with a significant amount of foreign exchange. The investigation revealed that another individual handed over the currency to the appellant in the airport lounge. Various documents, including passports, boarding passes, and a mobile phone, were found during the search, indicating the appellant's involvement in carrying the currency. The adjudicating authority concluded that the appellant was part of a smuggling racket based on the evidence presented.

The Revenue argued that smuggling of foreign currency does not grant immunity under the law, citing a relevant case law. The appellant, in the grounds of appeal, failed to establish innocence or disassociate from the smuggling activities, only challenging the veracity of recorded statements. Despite being arrested and produced before the Magistrate Court, the appellant could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the possession of the foreign currency, reinforcing the nexus with smuggling activities.

The evidence on record, including the modus operandi of the appellant, the recovery of foreign currency, and his presence at the airport, strongly indicated his involvement in smuggling. The appellant's inability to prove the legitimate source of possession led to the dismissal of the appeal. The adjudication was upheld, emphasizing the lack of interference due to the appellant's failure to demonstrate innocence or disprove the charges of possessing foreign currency unlawfully.