VENEELA TILAK Vs. SHAHASANE ASSTT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellant was charged for offences punishable u/s. 22 r/w Section 8 (c) and u/s 23 r/w Sec. 28 of the N. D. P. S. Act and u/s 135 (1) (a) r/w Section 135 (i) (ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. By his Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence dated 31.3.1993, the Ld. Special Judge, Greater Bombay convicted the Appellant-accused for offence punishable u/s 22 r/s 8 (c) of the N. D. P. S. Act 1985 and sentenced her to suffer R. I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- in default, she was to suffer R. I. for 2 years. THE accused was further convicted for offence punishable u/s 23 r/w Section 28 of the N. D. P. S. Act, 1985 and u/s. 135 (1) (A) r/w Section 135 (i) (ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 and she was sentenced to suffer R. I. for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. In default, she was to suffer further R. I. for 2 years. THE said Judgment and Order of conviction and sentence is challenged in the present appeal.

(2.) ACCORDING to the prosecution, secret information was received by the Complainant Mr. Shahasane on 5.8. 90 that the accused alongwith one South African, one Mr. Zain (since acquitted) was leaving Bombay for Lusaca by Zambia Airways flight No. 02081 which was flying on 6.8. 90 at about 3.15 a. m. from Sahar Airport, Bombay, Module-II. The accused and the other person, both South African nationals were to smuggle large quantity of Mandrex tablets, a psychotropic substance. Mr. Shahasane reduced the said information into writing, sealed the same and handed over the same to his higher authority. He discussed it with them. On the night between 5th and 6th of August 1990, at about 12.15 hours Mr. Shahasane contented his Deputy Director Mr. R. N. Kakkar and Mr. Sawant Superintendent, of N. C. B and called them to the Department Module-II at Sahar Airport, Bombay at about 1. 15 a. m. Thereafter Mr. Shahasane, Superintendent of N. C. B. met at the Airport and they went to the Departure Module-II at baggage X-ray machine. One Victor Peter, Asstt. Security Officer and Miss Varsha Parkar Asst. Security Officer were on duty on that night. Two witnesses were called at about 1. 30 a. m. on 6.8. 90. They were informed about the information received. After a few minutes a lady i. e. the present accused came there with three suit-cases. The suit-cases were brown, green and black in colour. She put them on the X-ray machine. , PW-3 Victor Peter noticed some concealment in the two suit-cases out of the 3 suit-cases which was viewed on the screen. Upon seeing this fact, Mr. Shahasane asked the accused her name and she gave her name as Veneela Tilak. He asked the accused to sit on a chair nearby the Customs Counter along with her baggage.

(3.) WE are informed that as regards Mr. Zain, the person who was with the present accused, a separate complaint was filed. He was separately tried and acquitted. The learned Counsel for the Appellant-accused Mr. Sachwani is unable to give us any particulars about the disposal of the said case. In any case we find that the said particulars are not necessary for the disposal of the present appeal.