BARKAT RAM KISHAN LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE marginally noted three revision petitions were referred to the Division bench by Chopra, J. , on account of judicial conflict between Calcutta and Madras high Courts on the points involved in the petition.

(2.) ON the 8th of June 1957 H. B. Das, Superintendent Customs received information about smuggling of Pakistan gold from Lahore to Amritsar by engine crew of the railway train coming from Lahore to Amritsar. He deputed Waris Ram, customs Inspector, Attari to travel in a railway engine from Attari to Amritsar. The other Customs officers were waiting for the arrival of the railway train at Amritsar railway Station. As soon as the train arrived at die platform the engine was surrounded by the customs staff. The three petitioners, namely, Barkat Ram, Ram murti and Jagan Nath were first asked to fill in the declaration forms which they did. The petitioners did not declare any gold in their possession. They were then simultaneously interrogated by different customs officials. Their interrogation led to the recovery of 100 tolas of gold from underneath the coal in the railway engine. The gold was taken into possession. The memo relating to this is Exhibit P. A. The customs officials still suspected more gold with the petitioners. They, therefore, took the petitioners to their office. Again the petitioners were questioned. All the three petitioners informed the customs officials that they had more gold lying in the railway engine. Consequently Ham Murti and Jagan Nath were again taken to the railway station but Barkat Ram refused to go. After midnight 65 bars of gold were found buried in the coal. Along with the gold a letter Exhibit P. E. was recovered which indicated that the gold was to be received by one Ghulam mohammad. The gold was taken into possession by means of memorandum exhibit P. D.

(3.) THE customs officials then set out for search of Gulam Mohammad mentioned in this letter. At 3 a. m. Waris Ram Inspector went to Grand Hotel Amritsar but he did not find this person there. He, however, found out that one Ghulam mahommad was occupying a room in that hotel. Two days later Ghulam mohammad petitioner was arrested in Amritsar. Some letters were also recovered from a search of the room occupied by him. During the enquiry the customs officials recorded confessional statements of the petitioners on different occasions. These statements have been taken into consideration by the Courts below for recording their convictions. The plea of the accused is that these statements were not voluntary and true but were the result of police pressure. Ultimately the Assistant Collector Land Customs Amritsar filed a complaint against the petitioners on the 13th of September 1957. They were tried by the Additional district Magistrate Amritsar and convicted and sentenced to imprisonments under section 23 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 (Act No. 7 of 1947) and also under Section 167 (81) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 (Act No. 8 of 1878 ). The petitioners' appeal was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge Amritsar on the 19th of March 1958. The petitioners then filed revision petitions in this Court which, as already mentioned, were referred to Division Bench.