RASHID GAFOOR PARKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are original accused Nos. 2, 3 and 4 in Criminal Case No. 59 of 1977 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dapoli. The petitioners are prosecuted for commission of offences under Section 135(a) and (b) of the Customs Act and Section 5 of the Import and Export Act read with Section 120 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners are facing trial along with 9 other accused. Accused Nos. 1 and 12 are reported to be dead. The offence was alleged to have been committed on November 23, 1968. The enquiries were made by the investigating officer and obtained prior sanction and the accused were put for trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dapoli. The learned Judicial Magistrate, on the basis of the statements made by other co -accused framed charge against the petitioners and other accused by his order dated May 31, 1982. It is this order of framing charge which is challenged by the petitioners in this revision.

(2.) THE summary of the order of the learned Magistrate shows that all the accused Nos. 1 to 12 including the present petitioners are said to be smugglers. They are residents of small village Bankot, District Ratnagiri. The petitioners are said to be real brothers along with the deceased brother, who was original accused No. 1. In the investigation, it was revealed that the petitioners and other accused were parties to criminal conspiracy to import into India and to take delivery of contraband goods in Indian Customs waters from foreign vessels which was to come on the sea off Bankot -Shriwardhan on the West Coast of Maharashtra to carry them ashore, to land them at unauthorised places near Bankot. It appears that original accused Nos. 5 to 9 were the persons who were found landing two vessels and both these vessels were brought to the sea -shore. As far as accused No. 3 is concerned, it appears that he kept a truck ready for loading smuggled goods. The prosecution led evidence of four persons. The witnesses included the police patil, who was panch for the search of the house of accused No. 6, custom inspector and some other witnesses who had produced original documents pertaining to registration of vessels.

(3.) THE statements of the other accused i.e. original accused Nos. 5 to 12 and also accused No. 1, were also recorded by the custom officer. It appears that the original statements of these accused persons were not available, though attempt was made to call for original statements. However, certified copies of the statements were made part of the record.