D L VYAS Vs. ARVINDBHAI HARIBHAI DESAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No. 1 Arvindbhai Haribhai Desai and one Umar Ibrahim were tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate First class Navsari for the offence punishable under sec. 135 of the Customs Act 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The learned Magistrate acqui- tted accused No. 2 of the offence he was charged with whereas respon- dent No. 1 who was accused No. 1 in that case was convicted of the offence punishable under sec. 135 of the Act and sentenced to R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2 30 and in default of payment of fine to suffer R.I. for a further period of one year.

(2.) According to the prosecution the Superintendent of Customs Mr. D. N. Desai received information that contraband goods were being car- ried by a boat in Purna river. It was expected that the above goods were to be carried by road after they were unloaded from the boat. He there- fore asked the persons from his department to keep a watch. At about 10 p.m. on 27-2-1962 a truck was sighted on the road and it was stopped near Maroli railway crossing. The truck was being driven by accused No. 1 Arvindkumar. When the truck was searched it was found that it cont- ained 80 packages which contained playing cards made in U.S.A. synthetic fabrics made in Japan pistachio nuts with shells and cloves. The total value of the goods was found to be Rs. 5 31 209 paise. The statement of accused No. 1 was recorded under sec. 108 of the said Act. According to accused No. 1 the goods in question belonged to accused No. 2-Umar Ibrahim. The goods in question were attached under a panchnama and in due course the Superintendent of Customs Bulsar filed a complaint against the aforesaid accused on 18th March 1974. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge. The learned Magistrate however relying on the evidence on record convicted respondent No. 1 of the offence punishable under sec. 135 of the Act as stated above. Being aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate accused No. 1 had preferred an appeal to the Sessions Court Navsari. The learned Sessions Judge while maintaining the conviction reduced the sentence imposed on accused No. 1 to R.I. for nine months and a fine of Rs. 2000.00 Accused No. 1 has paid up the fine. As the Custom authorities felt that there was no justification for the learned Sessions Judge to reduce the sentence and that the sentence was inadequate the Superintendent of Central Excise has come in revision to this court for enhancement of the sentence.

(3.) Respondent No. 1 has not come forward to contest this applica- tion. The learned trial Judge has found on the basis of the evidence on record that respondent No. 1 had imported contraband goods worth Rs. 5 31 209 paise. The order of conviction was not challenged in the Ses- sions Court. The learned Sessions Judge has observed in his judgment.