9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (10) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... one Shri Manjit Singh Grewal was searched on 27-4-1988 and the search resulted in the seizure of certain documents disclosing distribution of compensatory payments. The seized documents, i.e., the loose sheets contained a reference of payment of Rs. 65,000 in code words to Shri Phuman Singh. In his statement dated 16-6-1988, the appellant Sh. Phuman Singh stated, inter alia, that during the year 1988, he had received a payment of Rs. 65,000 from a person resident in India under the instructions of his relation residing in U.K. and that he had made a payment of Rs. 15,000 to a person resident in India by order and on behalf of a person resident outside India. In view thereof, following show-cause notices were served on the appellant: (i) Mem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e counsel for the appellant further submitted that in the absence of any specific mention of the name of person(s) on whose behalf the money has been paid/received as also owing to the lack of proof of the factum of actual remittance of the money, the offences in issue cannot be said to have been proved by the prosecution. It was also submitted on behalf of the appellant that the documents in issue were actually seized from the premises of a third person and not from the appellant and, as such, the seized documents, according to the counsel, would not have any bearing on the charges levelled against the appellant, particularly when the appellant was not supplied copy(s) of the seized documents. Alternatively, the counsel pleaded for a lenie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the confessional statement also discloses that the amount of Rs. 65,000 was received by the appellant on instructions of Sh. Shingara Singh (appellant's brother-in-law) and that he purchased agricultural land for Rs. 30,000 and spent the remaining amount on construction of the tube well and repair of tractor, etc. The aforesaid confessional statement is corroborated by the seized document written in coded language. The retraction was not immediately made. Therefore, there appears to be no reason why confessional statement should not be relied upon. The confessional statement appears to be voluntary and true. Further, relation between the amount involved and the alleged contravention is well established, unlike the case decided by the M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
