(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment dated 3rd July, 2000 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Cr. Appeal No. 86 of 1991, confirming the judgment dated 2nd August, 1991 passed by the Presiding Officer, Special Court (Economic Offices) Muzaffarpur, in Customs Case No. 5 of 1987, Trial No. 1650 of 1991.The revisionist was convicted for the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act and was sentenced to undergo RI for one year on the allegations that he was found carrying articles, such as, colour films, camera, zip fasteners, in all, worth Rs. 25,000/ -. The accused had failed to pay the customs duty on the aforesaid articles. The truck was detained at Motihari and the aforesaid irregularities were found. The trial Court, on the basis of evidence adduced before it, found the accused guilty and convicted and sentence him, as stated above. The appellate Court also did not find it convenient to interfere with the judgment of the trial Court.
(2.) IT has been submitted before me by the revisionist 'slawyer that the accused was at the relevant time of tender age and hence, he deserves condonation of his sentence. However, the revisionist has given his age on 17.5.1991 as 20 years. So on the date of occurrence, he would be above 16 years and hence, not entitled to the benefit of provisions of Offenders Act or Section 360, Cr PC. Offence of the kind has become rampant ones and the age of the offender will not be of much consequence, especially when he had already attained the age of 16 years and odd months.