1992 (7) TMI 71 - HC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Conviction under Section 5 of the Imports & Exports (Control) Act challenged in appeal.
2. Transfer of appeal from Sessions Court to High Court.
3. Failure to serve notice to appellant for engaging another advocate.
4. Surety's notice not served, leading to appeal hearing.
5. Appellant's defense and prosecution's case.
6. Acquittal under Section 135 of the Customs Act.
7. Conviction under Section 5 of the Imports & Exports (Control) Act upheld.
8. Set off for custody period and fine payment.

Analysis:

1. The appellant challenged the conviction under Section 5 of the Imports & Exports (Control) Act in the appeal after being acquitted of the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act. The appeal was admitted in the Sessions Court and later transferred to the High Court to be heard alongside another criminal appeal filed by the State.

2. The appeal was transferred from the Sessions Court to the High Court after a separate criminal appeal was filed by the State against the appellant's acquittal under Section 135 of the Customs Act. The High Court consolidated both appeals for joint hearing.

3. Due to the demise of the appellant's advocate, the High Court issued a notice for the appellant to engage a new advocate within a specified time frame. However, the notice was returned unserved as the appellant was not found at the given address, leading to the appeal being heard without the appellant's representation.

4. A notice to the surety, Mrs. Savitaben Babulal Zagda, was directed by the Court to show cause for potential penalty regarding the bonds furnished. Despite the notice not being served, the appeal was proceeded with alongside another related appeal.

5. The appellant's defense stated that he had no intention to conceal goods and jewelry while entering India from Dubai. The prosecution's case involved the Preventive Officer finding undeclared goods during a search at the airport, leading to the appellant's prosecution.

6. The appellant was acquitted of the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act, which was challenged by the State in a separate appeal. The High Court dismissed the State's appeal and confirmed the appellant's acquittal under Section 135.

7. Despite the acquittal under Section 135, the appellant was convicted under Section 5 of the Imports & Exports (Control) Act for attempting to contravene the provisions of the Act. The Court upheld the conviction, stating that even without intent, the act amounted to an offence under the law.

8. The appellant was sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment with a fine, which was paid in full. The Court granted set off for the period of custody served by the appellant, allowing him to avoid further imprisonment. The conviction under Section 5 was confirmed, and the appeal was dismissed, with the appellant's bail bonds formally cancelled.