SARWARI BEGUM Vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dated 23rd September, 2002, of the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Crl. A. No. 40/2002, whereby the learned Judge although took note of the fact that the act done by the Petitioner is that of concealing the gold in her rectum, whereby she made an attempt to smuggle the same yet taking into consideration her physical condition as also her age together with her poverty, has modified the sentence of imprisonment from one year to fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to SI for two months for offence under Section 132 of Customs Act and a fine of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on her under Section 135(1)(a) of Customs Act and in default to undergo SI for six months.

(2.) COUNSEL for the Petitioner challenges the enhancement of fine while confining his arguments only to the question of sentence. He submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while taking into consideration the fact that the Petitioner is a poor person in extreme poor health, has reduced the substantive sentence but has increased the fine to Rs. 60,000/- on both counts and in default to undergo eight months imprisonment on both counts. This counsel submits defends the very purpose of leniency since the Petitioner being a very poor person is unable to pay this hefty amount, although she has paid Rs. 10,000/- out of the same.

(3.) HEARD Counsel for the Parties and have gone through the judgment under challenge as also the material placed before me. From a perusal of the same, I find that the Appellate Court was considerate in interfering with the quantum of sentence, but having noted that the lady is a poor person, enhanced the fine, which makes the leniency non-existent and hardly of any use to the Petitioner.