9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (7) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The facts briefly are that on the basis of specific information, the Officers of Customs, Lucknow intercepted a truck No. LIG-9553 when it was leaving the premises of M/s. Singh Transport Co., 133/138 T.P. Nagar, Kanpur in the night of 23-8-96. The driver, Sh. Firoz Khan admitted on enquiry about concealment of ball bearings in packages of biscuits. The Officers brought the truck to Customs Office, Lucknow and got unloaded the packages of biscuits and recovered 79 packages of ball bearings valued at over Rs. 38 lakhs. Khalasi disclosed 11 packages of said consignment were still lying in the godown of M/s. Singh Transport Co., Kanpur which could not be loaded in the truck due to lack of space. On the basis of information given by the driver and Khalasi, the godown of the said company was raided by the Officers which resulted in the recovery of 11 packages of ball bearings valued at Rs. 3,04,500/-. The ball bearings were seized under Sec. 110 as they appeared to have illegally imported in violation of Notfn. No. 9/96, dt. 22-1-1996. Statement of Sh. Jasbir Singh who was present at the premises of M/s. Singh Transport was recorded on 24-8-1996 in which he stated that he was looking af ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various authorities about torture meted out to him; that the Customs Officers had searched the office and godown of M/s. Singh Transport and recovered packages; he was forcefully taken to the Customs office and badly beaten by the Officers there; that he was not at all or connected with the ball bearings recovered from godown of Singh Transport; that he was neither the owner of ball bearings nor he was concerned with the seized goods; that he cannot be punished on the basis of statement of co-accused person; that the Customs Officers had tried to falsely implicate his father and his father was an old man; that he was mentally disturbed after receipt of SCN. 5. In his written submissions before the adjudicating authority Shri Jaspal Singh denied charges levelled against him as well as his truck; he stated that the ball bearings had been loaded by the driver in the truck; that when the truck was loaded at the station the driver and conductor became custodians of the truck; if any illegal item is detected in the truck it was the driver and conductor who are responsible for the same and not the owner; that the ball bearings were not contraband goods; that the statement of driver and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... regards the defence taken by Sh. Jasbir Singh that he had no connection with Singh Transport Co., the Collector referred to the statement dt. 25-8-1996 given by Sh. Jasbir Singh wherein he had stated that he and his brother Sh. Jaspal Singh were the owner of Singh Transport Co. and work of the said firm at Kanpur was being looked after by him as well as his brother in owner's capacity while the work of Delhi branch was looked after by Sh. Shanker Lal under the supervision of Sh. Jaspal Singh. He also noted that the seized truck was found in the premises of Singh Transport Co. and it was intercepted when it was coming out on its way to Delhi. The statement given by driver and cleaner had confirmed that ball bearings were loaded at the premises of Singh Transport Co. in the presence of Sh. Jasbir Singh. The Commissioner also relied on the statement of Chowkidar of Singh Transport Co., Delhi recorded on 21-11-1996 stating that Jasbir Singh was the owner of Singh Transport Co. and that he was residing at Kanpur and the work of Singh Transport Co., Delhi was looked after by Sh. Ved Prakash and that the Manager of the company, Sh. Shanker Lal was not attending to the work since the last ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne Nasir in morning dt. 23-8-1996 and that he did not know that they were foreign made goods and that and he would not have kept the goods in the godown if he had known the factual position. He also drew attention to the fact that the name of Jasbir Singh cropped up first time in the statement given by the driver and cleaner on 24-8-1996 on the spot and subsequently summons under Sec. 108 was issued to Jasbir Singh to appear at Customs Office. It would be evident from this fact that as per the statement of the driver dt. 24-8-1996, Jasbir Singh was also present in the office of the Customs, Lucknow. In these circumstances, the statements recorded from Jasbir Singh on 24-8-1996 and 25-8-1996 were clearly involuntary and taken under duress and after forcibly kidnapping him. In this connection, he referred to the telegram dt. 26-8-1996 sent by Sh. Joginder Singh to the Commissioner of Customs, Lucknow stating that Sh. Jasbir Singh had been forcibly taken by the Customs Officers at 4 p.m. on 24-8-1996 and expressing fear that Sh. Jasbir Singh may be tortured by the Customs Officers. He also refers to the fact that the premises referred as 133/138, Transport Nagar, Kanpur were in fact a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whose premises ball bearings had been seized. The Commissioner had relied on panchnama as well as seizing officer s report to come to the conclusion that the ball bearings were smuggled from Nepal into India and the ball bearings contained marking made in Romania . The appellants have in their defence claimed that no independent enquiry had been made about foreign origin of the said goods and the basis for holding that they were of foreign origin and smuggled goods into India was solely on hearsay evidence of the driver and cleaner who were stated to have overheard a conversation between Jaspal Singh and Jasbir Singh about the smuggled nature of the goods and their being brought from Nepal. We find from the panchnama dt. 24-8-1996 that at Sl. Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (Page 23 of the paper book submitted in the appeal of Jaspal Singh) that these serial numbers refer to ball bearings - URB - made in Romania -6202, 6204ZZ and 6204ZZR . We find that the allegation relating to the third country of origin of seized ball bearings is therefore beyond dispute. As regards the involvement of Sh. Jasbir Singh in the loading of ball bearings into the truck at the premises of Singh Transport Co., we f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods being of foreign origin and the driver and cleaner not being able to produce any duty paying documents showing licit import thereof are fully established. Their statements showing knowledge about the smuggled nature of the goods makes liability to confiscation of the said truck under Sec. 115 fully legal and valid. However, we find that the Commissioner has not given any option to the owner of the truck to redeem the truck on payment of fine. Having regard to the provisions of Sec. 115(2), the owner of the vehicle has to be given option to redeem the truck. To the extent the Commissioner has not given the said option to Jaspal Singh, owner of the truck, we set aside that part of the order by which the truck has been confiscated without allowing option for paying redemption fine. We modify the order and give the appellant, Jaspal Singh an option to claim the said vehicle on payment of fine in terms of provisions of Sec. 115(2). We remand the matter to the adjudicating authority for allowing an option for redeeming the truck on payment of appropriate amount of fine as per law. 11. As regards the penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on Jaspal Singh, we find that evidence on record does not sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
