UNION OF INDIA Vs. ABDULKADAR ABDULGANI HASMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No. 1 in Criminal Appeal No. 798 of 1979 and Criminal Appeal No. 889 of 1979 was original accused No. 1 in the trial Court. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1259 of 1979 was original accused No. 2 in the trial Court while the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 1260 of 1979 was original accused No. 3 in the trial Court. Respondents Nos. 2 to 7 in Criminal Appeal No. 798 of 1979 and Criminal Appeal No. 889 of 1979 were original acccused Nos. 4 5 6 7 8 and 9 respectively. Hence we will refer to these respondents and appellants by their respective positions before the trial Court.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of these appeals may be briefly stated as follows:-

(3.) The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on appreciating the evidence recorded before him came to the conclusion that guilt of accused Nos. 2 and 3 was proved beyond reasonable doubt. He accordingly convicted accused No. 2 of the offence punishable under sec. 135 of the Customs Act 1962 and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 5000.00 and in default to rigorous imprisonment for nine months while he convicted accused No. 3 of the offence punishable under sec. 135 of the Customs Act 1962 and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs. 10 0 and in default to rigorous imprisonment for one year. The learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate however acquitted the rest of the accused because in the opinion of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate there was no reliable evidence to connect them with these goods except their bare statements before the Customs Officers which were again retracted. Being dissatisfied with the order of acquittal recorded in favour of original accused Nos. 1 and 4 to 9 the Union of India filed Criminal Appeal No. 798 of 1979 and the State of Gujarat filed Criminal Appeal No. 889 of 1979 The convicted accused filed Criminal Appeals in the Court of Session at Ahmedabad. They were ordered to be transferred to this Court because the two appeals against acquittal were filed before this Court. All these four appeals arise out of the same judgment delivered by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and hence they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.