9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 105X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Act'). 2. The trial Court vide its impugned judgment dated 14th November, 2000, held the petitioner guilty of offence punishable under Section 135 of the Act and vide a separate order of even date, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Ra. 2,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. Furthermore, the recovered foreign currency was ordered to be confiscated to the State under Section 113 of the Act. 3. Aggrieved against the same, petitioner had filed an appeal. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide its judgment dated 1st June, 2002, found no merit in the appeal and had dismissed the same, upho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Total = 32500/- 5. The total value of the foreign currency, when converted into Indian currency, came to Rs. 2,63,225/-. The foreign currency was seized and a memo under Section 110 of the Act was prepared to this effect. A Panchnama was also prepared. 6. On the above said complaint, the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar on 20th May, 1999 framed charge against the accused-petitioner, which reads as follows: "That you Mohammad Akbar on 31-1-1995 came at LC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other documents. 8. Thereafter, statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and all incriminating circumstances were put to him. He denied the same and pleaded innocence. 9. The accused petitioner, in defence had examined Mohammad Salim as DW-1, who stated that on 30th January, 1995, the petitioner was found scuffling with the customs officials and denying his possession of the foreign currency. 10. The trial Court relied upon the statement Ex.PD made by the accused-petitioner Mohammad Akbar before the customs officials and concluded that the foreign currency was acquired by the petitioner for its transportation to Lahore. The Court rejected the argument that non-examination of independent witness was fatal to the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o been cited. A Single Bench of Delhi High Court, in 'Mohd. Jamil v. Custom' 2002 (3) RCR (Criminal) 104, recognized the right of speedy trial and considering the fact that the accused had faced ordeal of trial for 12 years, had reduced the sentence to the period already undergone. Counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the order granting bail, wherein it was recorded that on the same allegations, in adjudication proceedings, petitioner was exonerated of all the charges. 13. 1 have perused the statement Ex.PD made by the accused-petitioner to the customs officials, wherein it has been stated that for carrying the foreign currency, the petitioner was to be paid Rs. 2,000/- by one Sajid. Petitioner was not a habitual smuggler. It ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
