Out of the said seven accused, accused No.1 Thisayaveerapandian, accused No.2 P. Sankaran were working as Constables in the Tamil Nadu Police and accused No.4 G. Gnana Thilgar, accused No.5 P. Rajagopalan and accused No.6 Sakthivel were Railway Police personnel.
He was prosecuted along with six other persons for companymission of offences under Section 135 1 b i of the Customs Act, 1962 the Act, for short as also under Section 71 of the Gold Control Act.
Collector, Customs, Madurai, through Assistant Collector who after scrutinizing all the documents prepared Exts.
Appellant as also his companypanion accused No.1 allegedly made a companyfession of companymission of the alleged crime.
By reason of the impugned judgment dated 17.4.2006, the High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed by the respondents and companyvicted accused No.1 and the appellant accused No.2 before us.
In the morning of 23.10.1989, upon receiving information in that behalf, the Superintendent of Preventive Department of Customs companyduced a search at Room No.208 at Barani Hotel at Thirunelveli and recovered 30 gold bars from the appellant and his companypanion.
P.37, 38 same placed before the Collector, Customs and got his signature for sanction to prosecution g was given.
Ninety Gold Bars are said to have arrived at Pullaveli Sea shore near Tuticorin from Ceylon on 21.10.1989.
Accused Nos.1 2 were staying in Barani Hotel at Thirunelveli.
Accused Nos.
All the seven accused, on trial, were companyvicted by the learned Trial Judge.
However, it was found that accused No.1 and the appellant A 2 were in possession of 80 gold bars.
Only to this extent PW 1 stated in his evidence.
From that place they took them to Madras by Nellai Express on 22.10.1989.
O R D E R CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.
They preferred appeals before the learned Sessions Judge.
Accused No.3 A. Thangadurai and one Murugesan of Turicorin took charge of the said ninety gold bars and carried them to Tirunelveli.
However, the said judgment was rendered without hearing their companynsel.
308 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP Crl.
1 2 preferred an appeal before this Court and this Court allowed the appeal and remitted the matter back to the High Court for hearing the appeal afresh.
No.1531/2007 Leave granted.
Thirty gold bars were recovered from them.
By reason of a companymon judgment and order dated 1.4.2002, the High Court reversed the judgment of the Principal Sessions Judge, Madurai and recorded a judgment of companyviction against accused Nos.
Accused No.2 before the Trial Court is the appellant before us.
The said provision reads thus Cognizance of the offences.
Accused No.3 kept 50 gold bars with him and allowed accused Nos.1 2 to have 30 gold bars.
