2012 (9) TMI 605 - HC - Customs

Seizure - Gold biscuits of foreign origin - offence under Section 135 of Customs act and Section 85 of Gold Control Act acquittal of the respondent/accused - Held that - No seizure mahazar has been drawn at the place where the car was seized nor any witnesses are examined from the neighbourhood - place where the car was stopped was busy area with many shops and commercial establishments, as admitted by PWs.1 and 3 in the cross-examination but none of the occupants of the neighbouring shops and establishments were cited as witnesses and no mahazar was drawn at the place where the vehicle was seized - grounds on which the accused are acquitted are based on the evidence on record and that there is no illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Magistrate - appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to judgment of acquittal under Section 135 of Customs Act and Section 85 of Gold Control Act.

Analysis:
The appeal challenges the judgment of acquittal under Section 135 of Customs Act and Section 85 of Gold Control Act. The complainant alleged that the accused were in possession of contraband gold with foreign markings, leading to the charges. The prosecution presented 5 witnesses and various exhibits to support their case. However, the defense denied the allegations, leading to the trial court's acquittal decision based on lack of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

During the appeal, it was noted that one of the accused had passed away, resulting in the abatement of the case against that individual. The arguments presented by both sides focused on the clarity and credibility of the evidence provided during the trial. The complainant's counsel emphasized the strength of the prosecution's evidence, while the defense maintained the legality of the acquittal order.

The complaint filed by the Assistant Collector of Customs detailed the events leading to the seizure of the contraband gold and the subsequent legal proceedings. Witness testimonies, including those of customs officials and a goldsmith, were presented to establish the case against the accused. However, discrepancies emerged during cross-examination, raising doubts about the veracity of the prosecution's claims.

The judgment highlighted the importance of proving the case beyond reasonable doubt and the need for solid evidence to support the allegations. The court examined the trial court's decision and concluded that there was no legal flaw or injustice in the acquittal order. Emphasizing the high threshold for reversing acquittals, the appellate court found no grounds to interfere with the trial court's decision, ultimately dismissing the appeal.

In summary, the judgment revolved around the challenge to the acquittal under Sections 135 of Customs Act and 85 of Gold Control Act. The case involved conflicting testimonies, evidentiary discrepancies, and the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The appellate court upheld the trial court's decision, emphasizing the need for strong evidence to support criminal charges and the reluctance to overturn acquittals unless gross injustice is evident.