LexKEWAL KRISHAN versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
3 s.c.R.
SUPREME COURT REP(_)RTS
613
is oolonrable and not bona fide, s. 25G has no
application
and the respondents, therefore, are
not entitled to any relief under that section. In
the result the appeal is allow0d, the order of the
Tribunal is· set aside and the reference answered
against
the respondents. In the circumstances
the parties will bear their own costs throughout.
Appeal allowed.
KEWAL Kl{ISHAN
v.
STATE OF PUN.JAB
(J. L. KAPUR, P. B. GAJENDRAGADKAR and T. L.
VENKATARAMA AIYAR, JJ.)
Sea Customs-Goods eeized in reasonable . belief that they
are smuggled-Burden of proof-If on person from whose posses-
sion goods are seized-Con8litntionality of statutory provis·ion-
The Sea Custom; Act, 1878(8 of 1878),
88 . .167(81), 178A-
Foreign Exchange Regu.lation Act, J.947(7 of 1947), 8. 23A.
The appellant was searched by a Customs Official .and
some bars of gold were found tied round his walst.
Out. of
those bars some were of base metal and the re~t of pure g-old
which bore foreign marks.
Th~ appellant had no permit from
the Reserve Bank of India to import the gold.
He was prose-
cuted and convicted un.cler :;·. 23i\ of the FQrcign Exchange
Regulation Act ands. 167(81) of the Sea Customs Act.
He
brought an appeal to the Supreme Court by special leave.
Held, thats. l 78A of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, is
constitutiona.1.
The contention that before the presumption under
s. l 78A of the Sea Customs Act could he raised the prosecution
had to prove that the gold was of foreign origin was rejected
and it was held thats. l 78A provides that when the goods are
seized in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods
the onus is on the accused to show that they are not smuggled.
Collector of Customs, Madras v. Nat/iella Sampathu~Chetty
\1962) 3 S.C.R. p. 786 followed.
·
1962
1 he Managt111111I of
Indian Gabie Co.,
Ltd., Calcutta
v.
Its Workmen
AVar J,
1962
A1areh 6.
1962
litu:al Krishan
v,
Stale 11/ Punjab
614
SUPRE~f~ COURT REPORTS [1962) SUPP.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE .TURJSJJICTIOX : Criminal
A p1wn 1 No. I '.!6 of l!J5!l.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment
and order dated .June 19, l!J5!1, of the Punjab High
Court in Criminal Revi~ion :No 144 of 195!1. ·
R. L. Kohli'., for the appellant.
G. C. Matlwr and P. D. Jfenon, for tho respon-
dent.
l 9fi2. jfarch 6.
The .Judgment of the Court
was deliverc>d by
KAPl'H, J.-This is ~.n appeal by special leave
against the judgment and order of the High Court
of the Punjab and raises tho constitutionality of
s.l lliA of the Sc:1 Customs Act, 18iS (Act 8 of
1871'), which ha.H bellfi held by this Court to be con-
stitutional in the· Colleclor of Custom.~,
Jfa.dra.~ v.
N at!u:lla Sarnpa.tl:n Chcll.1f ( 1).
At the time of arguments before us ~ further
point was raised that in order that s. J 78A of the
~ea Customs Ac:t may become applicable, the pro-
secution must. further prove that the goods which
wcrn sought to h" affeckd by the order of the Cus-
toms Offirer 1rnre goocls of foreign origin and them
must be evidence in Rupport of the reasonablc-
ne~s of thl' belief of thP Customs Offic·er that the
goods were &mugglcd goods. The question now
8011ght. to he raised was not agitated in any of thn
courts below.
The nppcllant on .February I I, I 958, whm1 he
wa" sitting in a th ire! class compartment of the
Amritsa Kalka train ~tanding on Platform No. ii of
the .Amrsar n~.ilway Rta t.ion, Wall searched hy a
Customs Offidal anci' S(•mc b3rn of gold were fm;nd
tied round his waist.
TheHe gold bars were sPized
and a recovery memo was prepared. Out oftheRe gold
(!) [1%2~ 3. S.C..R. 786,
3 S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
615
bars four were of base metal and the rest were of
pure gold some bearing the stamp of Johmon Mathey
& Co. Ltd., 999-10 tolas and 2-1/4 bars bore marks of
N.M. Rothschild & Sons 10 tolas (990-0). ·No permit
from the the Reserve Bank to import this gold was
produced by the appellant. Under the Foreign
Exchange Regulation Act, 11:147, the importation of
gold witho11t such permit is prohibited and such
contravention is punishable under s.23-A of the
said Act read with s.167 (81) of the Sea Customs
Act.
The app"llant was prosecuted under.s.23A of
the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and 167( 81)
of the Sea Customs Act and his defence was that he
was not in possession of the gold bars which were
taken from an attache case left by a stranger under
the seat where he (the appellExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.