SOUMENDU SAHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The subject matter of challenge in the writ petition was an order dated 6th November, 2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Port) by which besides confiscating the goods, order was passed directing payment of penalty which insofar as the same is directed against the writ petitioner, reads as follows:

(2.) Aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the writ petition, the appeal was preferred by the writ petitioner. Mr. Choudhury, learned Advocate for the appellant writ petitioner submitted that the learned Trial Court dismissed the writ petition without applying mind to the facts and circumstances of the case. He drew our attention to the following part of the impugned judgment passed by the Customs authorities which reads as follows:

(3.) Mr. Choudhury submitted that the prosecutor has relied upon the report allegedly submitted by the BSNL. The contents of the report are nothing more than an allegation and could not have been taken into account nor could be treated as evidence unless the contents of the report were proved in accordance with law. He submitted that the report has been relied upon against his client. The report was never proved. His client requested the prosecutor to permit him to cross-examine the person who had prepared the report. In reply, his client was told to disclose name of the person, he wanted to cross-examine.