9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 1155X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 26-4-2010 passed by learned ACMM. This case pertains to the year 1988. The complaint case was filed bearing CC No. 392/1/88 under Sections 135(1)(b) of Customs Act and 85(1) Gold (Control) Act by the petitioner against the respondent. The learned Trial Court framed the charges against the accused Gopal Chand Khandelwal under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act on 15-10-2001. The said order of f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (ii) The allegations of Mahavir Prasad Khandelwal that the statement made by him was retracted and it was obtained under duress. 2. The parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court on 20-10-2009. Thereafter, the learned ACMM heard the arguments afresh and discharged all the accused persons vide order dated 26-4-2010. As per the said order, the learned ACMM has held as under : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d persons recorded u/s. 108 of the Customs Act, should not be used against them for proving the offence u/s. 85(1) of the Gold (Control) Act because Section 108(1) empowers any gazetted officer of customs to summon any person for any inquiry under the Customs Act and not under any other law. Otherwise also the circumstances already coming on record reflect that exertion of influence or pressure ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under a serious shadow of doubt. Hence, no conviction can be passed on the basis of material available on record against either of the accused. In such circumstances, when there would not be any possibility of conviction of either of the accused, even if, the prosecution case brought on record till date, remains unrebutted, accused are entitled for discharge. Held accordingly. Accused are disc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
