9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (10) TMI 432X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... toms officers and Border Security Force personnels near village Agro Chak on Indo-Pak Border. At about 3 A.M. two persons were seen by the naka party and on challenged the person managed to escape under the cover of darkness. But they left behind two gunny bags. On search 58 Kgs of Heroin was found in 58 packets in the gunny bags. The Heroin was taken into possession under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. Subsequently on 23-7-1990, 18 Kgs. of Heroin was recovered from a defence bunker of village Agra Chak. This Heroin was also taken, into possession under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. During investigation all the recovered Heroin was found to be of one consignment. 3. In follow up action the Customs officers summoned three pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ets to one Sudesh Kumar. The bags were kept in room of Rajesh Kumar. After about one month the bags were returned to Som Nath and Swaran Lal. 5. Rajesh Kumar in his statement under Section 108 of Customs Act corroborated the statement given by Naresh Kumar. 6. Darshan Singh who is brother of Swaran Lal in his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act admitted that he knew Som Nath and he admitted that four packets of heroin recovered from his house were given to him by Des Raj appellant for sale. 7. Des Raj appellant who was under detention under the Public Safety Act at that time in his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 denied the link with recovered heroin. 8. After adjudication impugned order is passed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his statement admitted that he knew Swaran Lal. Further Darshan Singh in his statement stated that four packets recovered from his house were given by Des Raj appellant for sale on commission basis. 13. Regarding discharge of the appellant from the criminal case, in that case, Counsel for Customs might have conceded that there was not sufficient evidence against the appellant for his prosecution in criminal case. The criminal proceedings and departmental adjudication are based on different principle. Hon ble Supreme Court in case Naresh J. Sukhawani v. Union of India reported in 1996 (83) E.L.T. 258 (S.C.) held that the statement made before the Customs officials is not a statement recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
