9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (4) TMI 1185X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tone of the decisions of the Apex Court, this Court can interfere with the well-reasoned judgment and order of the Trial Court. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Criminal Appeal No. 767 of 1993 with Crl. A. No. 768 of 1993 - - - Dated:- 21-4-2015 - K.J. Thaker, J. Shri Devang Vyas, Advocate, for the Appellant. Ms. Monali H. Bhatt, Additional Public Prosecutor, for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Heard learned Advocate Mr. Devang Vyas for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Monali H. Bhatt for the respondent-State. 2. By way of these appeals, the appellant (the original complainant), the Assistant Collector of Customs, Customs House, Valsad has felt aggrieved by the judgment and order of acquittal dated 19-11-1991 of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Valsad in Criminal Case No. 5/1989 whereby the respondents herein were acquitted of the offences punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, under Section 85 of the Gold Control Act and under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The case in brief is as under :- It is the case of the complainant that the Customs Office, Valsad Division had rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gold and the accused are alleged to have kept this gold in their custody and thus violated Section 8(1) of the Gold Control Act. Further, the accused did not reveal the information about this gold to the proper Officer and therefore, violated Section 85 of the Gold Control Act. With regard to this incident, the Collector - Customs, Ahmedabad gave prior sanction for lodging of complaint and hence, the complaint in this respect was lodged on 11-7-1988. Since the complaint in this case was a sort of private complaint and the crimes were warrant triable, before the charge-sheet were framed against the accused, the prosecution was given the opportunity of bringing the evidences in the presence of the accused. After hearing both the sides, the charge-sheet was framed qua the accused vide Exhibit 149. The accused did not object to the said charges. A request was made to further try the case and all witnesses were cross-examined and the complainant was giving the opportunity to produce further evidences. After the statements were taken, it is the case that the Customs officers forcibly and illegally took the signature of the accused on some written papers and thus, the accused were a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ief Judicial Magistrate, Valsad requires to be upturned. 6. Per contra, it is submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Monali H. Bhatt for the respondent-State has taken this Court through the judgment and order of the learned Judge and has submitted that no interference is called for in the well-reasoned order. 7. At this stage, it is relevant to reproduce Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, which reads as under :- 120B. Punishment of criminal conspiracy. - (1) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years or upwards, shall, where no express provision is made in this code for the punishment of such a conspiracy, be punished in the same manner as if he has abetted such offence. (2) Whoever is a party to a criminal conspiracy other than a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence punishable as aforesaid shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding six months or with fine or with both. 8. It is also necessary to reproduce Section 135 of the Customs Act, which reads as under :- 135. Evasion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o be recorded in the judgment of this court such imprisonment shall not be for less than (one year). (3) For the purposes of sub-sections (1) and (2), the following shall not be considered as special and adequate reasons for awarding a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than (one year), namely :- (i) the fact that the accused has been convicted for the first time for an offence under this Act; (ii) the fact that in any proceeding under this Act, other than a prosecution, the accused has been ordered to pay a penalty or the goods which are the subject matter of such proceedings have been ordered to be confiscated or any other action has been taken against him for the same act which constitutes the offence; (iii) the fact that the accused was not the principal offender and was acting merely as a carrier of goods or otherwise was a secondary party to the commission of the offence; (iv) the age of the accused. 9. I have heard learned Advocates for the parties and have perused the records of the case. The accused No. 1 - Babu Madhu Tandel has been unserved for a period of 22 years. Be that as it may, qua the vehement submission of learned Advocate Mr. Devang ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
