9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (8) TMI 779X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DLA confirms the same. Presently the appeal is taken up for hearing on merit. The appellant s counsel has filed written submissions which are taken on record. 2. The admitted facts are that premises of one Shri Mantu Kumar were searched where four documents with certain amount of Indian currency were recovered. The said Mantu Kumar gave a confessional statement implicating the appellant involving him in contravention of FERA, 1973. Similarly, the appellant made confessional statement, which he later retracted, involving him in the activities in contravention of section 9(1)(b) of FERA, 1973. The main contention of the appellant is that a confession of a co-accused cannot be made as basis of arriving at guilt. Further it is pleaded that a r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s is a bald statement without slightest proof on the record. The bald statement made by the appellant cannot be accepted as decided by Hon ble Supreme Court in K.T.M.S. Mohd. v. UOI [1992] 3 SCC 178 as under:- We think it is not necessary to recapitulate and recite all the decisions on this legal aspect. But suffice to say that the core of all the decisions of this Court is to the effect that the voluntary nature of any statement made either before the Customs authorities or the officers of Enforcement under the relevant provisions of the respective Acts is a sine qua non to act on it for any purpose and if the statement appears to have been obtained by any inducement, threat, coercion or by any improper means that statement must be rejecte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruth. There is nothing on record that admissions by the appellant are not voluntary or are wrong. The citations relied on by the appellant s counsel are of little help and needs no further discussion. The judgments given by the Court cannot be treated as a statutory enactment where they contain co-related discussion of facts. Devoid of facts the judgment cannot be read in isolation. Certain paras are emphasized out of cited judgments as deciding legal principles without referring to facts, as the proposition of law laid down therein. This approach of dis-section from the context is wrong and is against settled legal position. The discussion in any judgment has to be read in the context it is stated. Recently, the Supreme Court in Collector ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
