1991 (5) TMI 61 - HC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Prosecution under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 based on recovery of goods near village Bola Chak.
2. Acquittal of four individuals by the trial court.
3. Appeal filed by the Assistant Collector of Customs against the acquittal.

Issue 1: Prosecution under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962
The judgment pertains to the prosecution of nine individuals under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, based on the recovery of goods near village Bola Chak. The sanction for prosecution was accorded by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Chandigarh, against the nine individuals for attempting to export goods improperly out of India. The trial court prosecuted the individuals, but some were absconding, one was discharged, and four were acquitted. The prosecution's case was centered on proving that the recovered articles were dutiable before export from India.

Issue 2: Acquittal of Four Individuals
The trial court acquitted Palwinder Singh, Gurbachan Singh, Mrs. Swinder Kaur, and Fazal Mohd. based on the lack of evidence proving the recovered articles were genuine and dutiable. The prosecution witnesses' statements were inconclusive regarding the nature of the recovered stones, with uncertainty about whether they were synthetics, cultured, or genuine. The valuation of the articles was obtained, but the valuer was not examined, leading to doubts about the authenticity of the recovered goods.

Issue 3: Appeal by Assistant Collector of Customs
The Assistant Collector of Customs, Amritsar, filed an appeal challenging the acquittal of the four individuals. The appeal contended that the recovered articles were subject to duty before export, as per Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. However, the High Court, after hearing arguments from both sides, upheld the trial court's decision. The court concluded that the recovered articles were not proven to be dutiable before export, rendering the appeal without merit. Consequently, the appeal against the acquittal of the respondents was dismissed.

This judgment highlights the importance of establishing the dutiability of goods in customs-related prosecutions under the Customs Act, 1962. The burden of proof lies on the prosecution to demonstrate that the goods were subject to duty before export, failing which the prosecution case may not succeed.