9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (2) TMI 56X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pprehended as soon as he had got into a moving train and on being taken out of the train, he was searched and was found in possession of the gold in dispute weighing 149 Tolas 11 Mashas and 6 Ratties. He denied the possession of the gold and later on gave a statement (copy of which has been filed with the return as Annexure R-1) in which he appears to have made a clean breast of the circumstances and implicated his employer, the deceased petitioner and in substance he stated that the petitioner used to melt gold of foreign markings and used to send it through him to Delhi and he had done it a number of times. He was in possession of a railway ticket from Amritsar to Ludhiana, although he had to proceed to Delhi. The Customs Officers seized the gold and later, on the same day, recorded the statement of the petitioner (copy of which has been filed as Annexure R-3). Subsequently the Collector of Customs issued a show cause notice dated 14th November, 1958 and followed it with another show cause notice (Annexure A-1) dated 22nd December, 1958, calling upon the petitioner as well as Sohan Lal to show cause against the confiscation of the gold in dispute as well further penal action agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act does not apply to the facts of the case and at all events, the statutory presumption cannot be drawn against the petitioner Narottam Dass, even if it could be raised against Sohan Lal. Secondly, the customs authorities had collected evidence behind the back of the petitioner and the impugned order suffers from a contravention of principles of natural justice. 5.I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at considerable length. Section 178A of the Sea Customs Act reads as follows :- "178A Burden of proof. - (1) Where any goods to which this section applies are seized under this Act in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods, the burden of proving that they are not smuggled goods shall be on the person from whose possession the goods were seized. (2) This section shall apply to gold manufactures, diamonds and other precious stones, cigarettes and cosmetics and any other goods, which the Central Government may, by notification in the official Gazette, specify in this behalf. (3) Every notification issued under sub-section (2) shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after it is issued." I am of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rities had secret information about the activities of Sohan Lal and they had kept a close watch on him. He was found to be moving in suspicious circumstances and he did not board the train, until it started moving and he jumped into the moving train. The raiding party followed him and after apprehending him, pulled the alarm chain and brought him down and then Sohan Lal disclosed his identity and gave his father's name and at first, he denied being in possession of gold, but when he was, in the background of the information closely examined, a hard substance was felt on his body and personally searched which resulted in the recovery of one arch shaped bar of gold mentioned above tied round his waist. These circumstances would afford adequate grounds for entertaining a reasonable belief. On further interrogation, Sohan Lal disclosed that in order to hoodwink the customs he had as per instructions of his employer purchased a ticket only upto Ludhiana, although he had to change the train for Delhi. In these circumstances the gold bar was seized under a reasonable belief that the same was smuggled. 7.In my opinion, the circumstances of the case constitute sufficient grounds for the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on has no force. The Supreme Court in Babulal Amthalal Mehta v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta, AIR 1957 S.C. 877 observed that the presumption was available not only against the person from whose possession the articles had been recovered, but also all other persons connected with him, although it might be a hard case. In the circumstances of the present case, Sohan Lal was admittedly only a carrier of the gold and the real person who owned the gold and had caused it to be sent through Sohan Lal and had attempted to send it from him to his son at Delhi was Narotam Dass petitioner. The legal presumption, if it has any value, must be applied against the petitioner. As a result I reject the contention of the counsel for the petitioner and hold that the presumption under Section 178A has been rightly applied and the petitioner has failed to discharge the onus placed on him and the decision of the customs authorities does not suffer from any infirmity. 10.The second contention raised on behalf of the petitioner has no merit at all. The main grievance raised by him was against the admissibility of the statement of Sohan Lal which the Collector and the Board of Revenue both repelled. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
