VISHWA NATH KHANNA Vs. THE STATE AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been brought against the order dated May 10, 1979, of an Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, by which he had directed the farming of charges against the petitioner for offences punishable under Ss. 132 and 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act and S. 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner had returned to India by Lufthansa Flight No. 645 on January 3, 1974. On arrival at the airport, the petitioner presented himself for Customs clearance and declared that his unaccompanied baggage from Hongkong contained one tape -recorder with two speakers which is yet to arrive and he obtained a landing certificate from the Customs officials. Two packages had arrived at Palam Airport by the same flight in which the petitioner had come and those packages were stated to contain the personal effects of the petitioner.

(3.) On January 4, 1974, two more packages of the petitioner, which were unaccompanied baggage declared by the petitioner earlier, had arrived by Pan -American Air Lines Flight 001. The airway bill in respect of the said two packages showed that the same were unaccompanied baggage containing personal effects of the petitioner. The petitioner himself was shown as consignor as well as consignee in the said airway bill. The petitioner obtained the delivery orders in respect of the said two packages from the Pan -American Airlines, New Delhi. However, the petitioner did not choose to come to the customs office for obtaining the delivery of the said two packages and he was, thus, summoned by the Customs officials under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act for recording his statement and on a few dates he did not appear but ultimately he appeared on March 15, 1974 and made a statement under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act and mentioned therein that he had handed over the tape recorder and two speakers and his personal effects contained in four packages to the travel agent in Hongkong for booking the same in his name. The petitioner went on to disown the said two packages without even bothering to examine the contents of the said packages. The said packages were, thus, opened in presence of independent witnesses and the representatives of the Airlines and each one of the packages was found to contain a speaker of AKAI made in Japan and further examination of the speakers led to the recovery of contraband goods from the said speakers. It was also revealed in inquiry that the accused had contacted the Pan -American Airlines on January 5, 1974 and had obtained the delivery order in respect of the said two packages from the said Airlines. One of the packages contained a shirt having the washerman's mark which tallied with the washerman's mark on the clothes seized from the petitioner at his residence. The goods so recovered being of foreign origin were seized under Sec. 110 of the Customs Act, the import of the said goods being prohibited. So, the petitioner is stated to have committed the offences punishable under S. 135(1)(a) of the Customs Act and S. 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947 and S. 132 of the Customs Act as well.