9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (2) TMI 205X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confiscated the seven pieces of primary gold weighing 1,308.300 gms. valuing at Rs. 3,00,909/- which is alleged to have been seized from the secret organ of the appellant Madhu Agarwal. The personal penalty of Rs. 10,000/- was imposed on each of the appellants, both under the Customs Act and Gold (Control) Act. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on the basis of information, the Customs Officers of Naxalbari intercepted the appellant Hemant Agarwal and his wife Madhu Agarwal at L.R.P. Road on 17-6-1986 while coming in a taxi WGX 5439. It is stated that on search of their persons at the Custom House, seven pieces of gold of foreign origin were recovered from the possession of Madhu Agarwal. Hemant Kumar Agarwal, according to the Depart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the confessional statements of the appellants go to show that the gold in question was found in the possession of Madhu Agarwal. He pointed out that there is no reason as to why the Officers should implant these seven pcs. of gold on the appellant. He prayed for the dismissal of the appeals. 5. The point that arises for our determination is whether the gold in question was recovered from the possession of the appellant Madhu Agarwal and whether the statements given by the appellants are voluntary and true. 6. In the first instance, on a perusal of the inventory list, it was observed that the gold was seized at Naxalbari Customs Preventive Unit. There is no mention in the inventory list that the gold was seized from the possession of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Unit, Naxalbari . The name of the seizing Officer is mentioned is Shri S. Chakraborty, Inspector of Customs. Therefore, it is highly doubtful whether the seven gold pieces were recovered from the private organ of Madhu Agarwal. On the contrary, the evidence indicates that this story is not a true one. Accordingly, we hold that the prosecution has not proved that this gold pieces were recovered from the possession of appellant Madhu Agarwal. 8. But the second question for our consideration is whether the statements given by Madhu Agarwal as well as Hemant Kumar Agarwal were true and voluntary. The appellants were taken to Office of Customs at 11.30 a.m. Appellant Madhu Agarwal was having a baby of one-and-half year old. The statements we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
