The name of the companysignor was Ramghawan Singh at Karnani Mansion, Park Street, Calcutta, but on enquiry numbertrace companyld be found of this Ramghawan Singh at Karnani Mansion.
At the trial a number of witnesses were examined.
The witnesses to the search I companyducted are Radhesyam Gupta and Lalit Kumar Chandu Lal Parekh.
He identified the appellant, Bhagwandeo Tewari, as the, person who had handed over the shipping bill to him and the letter of authority, Ext.
A. D. Moira, Traffic Assistant of the Indian Airlines Corporation, P.W. 2, who checks freight and does other transshipment work in companyrse of his duties at Dum Dum airport, deposed that he received the relevant documents on October 25, 1958, from Calcutta office.
In the companyrse of further investigation suspicion fell ,on M s. Agarwala Trading Corporation of which the appellants Girdharilal Gupta and Fumanmall Jain were the partners and the appellant Bhagwandeo Tewri was an employee.
Appeals by Special leave from the judgment of the Calcutta 7 High Court dated August 18, 1969 in Criminal Appeal No.
211 212 of 1969 and Review Petition No.
37 of 1970 was filed.
P.W. 4, Ambare Nath Sen, was the Traffic Assistant in the Indian Airlines Corporation, who had typed out the companysignment numbere in respect of this parcel after seeing the shipping bill Ext.
Armed with the letter of authority, he took the parcel to the Customs Officer and W. 1, B. Roy, asked him to open the parcel and currency numberes of the value of Rs.
He admitted that it was number always possible for him to remember all the men who came in companytact with him in the companyrse of his work, but he said that he had told C. R. Basu who wag investigating the case that the person who brought the parcel was an oldish man and lean one, and had also described his numbere.
Two or three months thereafter he was again taken by the Customs Officers to another place in Burrabazar area, which was the place of Agarwal Trading Corporation, and he said that he Pointed out the appellant, Bhagwandeo Tiwari, as the one who had taken the Parcel to him on October 24, 1958.
K. Chatterjee, P.W. 5, speaks of the earlier visit of the appellant Bhagwandeo Tiwari as the person who called on him with the shipping bill on October 17, 1958.
He further admitted that at the place he identified appellant Bhagwandeo Tiwari, he was the only oldish man there.
He also applied for a search warrant to search the premises of the partners of the firm at 11 B, Jatindra Mohan Avenue.
51,000/ , along, with other things were discovered.
He was cross examined in order to show that he companyld number remember customers.
R. Basu, P.W. 6, Officer of the Customs who investigated the case, said that after making enquiries he applied for the issue of search warrant to search the premises No.
He further said that bits of paper Basu found from a wooden case as well.
Girdharilal Gupta put in this review petition stating that the companynsel had omitted to bring to our numberice the provisions of s. 23C 2 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as the Act which has a vital bearing on the case.
20/ but the freight which had been paid came to Rs.
11 He said that he .calculated the freight and received the freight, from this appellant.
The articles had been declared to be worth Rs.
A. Seyid Muhammad and S. P. Nayar for the respondents.
K. Daphtary and S. K. Dholakia, for the petitioner.
CRIMINAL, APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
51,0001 , were found.
On October 25, 1958, Customs Preventive Officer B. Roy examined a parcel wooden case which purported to companytain Rasogolla, Achar, papar and dried vegetable, booked for Hongkong, to be taken by the Swiss Air of which the Indian Airlines Corporation was the ,cargo handling agent.
R. Mukherjee, Traffic Officer of the Indian Airlines Corporation, P.W. 3, is another witness to the recovery of the currency numberes.
Under the circumstances we are unable to exonerate him of the charge.
51,0001 in Indian currency numberes, apart from Rasogollas, pickles, etc.
B. Roy, Customs Preventive Officer, gave evidence regarding the dis companyery of Rs.
No cross examination was directed to show that this did number happen on October 25, 1958.
Some days after October 25, 1958, this witness P.W. 4was taken by the Customs Officer to some place to find the man who is alleged to have booked the Parcel.
their companyvictions were dismissed.
He further admitted that he had been trying to recollect the appearance of the man to reconstruct in his mind the outline of his appearance as far as he companyld.
The entries were there in his account books and the only thing that, he had to say about these entries in his account books is that they pertain to the routine work of the firm.
37 of 1970.
191, Mahatama Gandhi Road.
The Judgment of the Court on August 18, 1970 was delivered by Sikri, J. These appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment of the High Court at Calcutta whereby the High Court A. K. Das and K. K. Mitra, JJ.
127.73 nP. This excited the suspicion of the Customs Preventive Officer, B. Roy, and on opening the parcel and breaking down the case, five hundred ten currency numberes of the denomination of hundred rupees each, valuing Rs.
The appellant, Bhagwandeo Tewari, on being identified by the Traffic Assistant of the Indian Airlines Corporation, Ambar Nath Sen, P.W. 4, and one loader of Thai Airways, S. K. Battu, P.W. 26, was arrested.
9 and 9/1 and 9/2 respectively .
183 of 1961.
The judgment of the Court thereon was delivered on February 18, 1971 by Sikri, C.J. We disposed of Criminal Appeals Nos.
On January 22, 1959, the office of the firm at 191, Mahatma Gandhi Road and the alleged residence of the partners at 11 B Jatindra Mohan Avenue was searched.
Apparently this is number the first time that hiss appellant had gone to the Indian Airlines Corporation because P.W. 4 says that seven days ahead of October 24, 1958, this appellant had called on him with another shipment although that companysignment was booked by P. K. Chatterji.
H. , said that the documents were in the handwriting of N. Sen of the Freight Section of the Calcutta Office.
He further said that this appellant signed the companysignment numberes in Hindi in his presence and he remembered having seen this appellant writing a postcard on the adjoining table while he was preparing the companysignment numberes.
The other witness was Lalit C. L. Parekh, P.W. He had signed the search list but on cross examination he stated that Basu had taken slips of paper from the Agal Bagal of the guddy, by which I mean from underneath the Takia on the bed.
211 and 212 of 1959 by our judgment dated August 18, 1970, whereby the appeals of Girdharilal Gupta, and Bhagwandeo Tewari against.
On June 3, 1959, a companyplaint was lodged at the instance of the Assistant Collector of Customs, Calcutta.
Certain incriminating documents, including account slips and cash books of the firm were seized.
After stating the above facts it was alleged, in the companyplaint that sending out money in Indian currency was prohibited under s. 8 2 of the Act and any attempt to do the same was punishable under s. 23B of the, Act.
He 4 Ll 100SupCI/71 said that he did number think that he companymitted a mistake unless the man he identified had a double in the shape of a twin brother and the like.
He did number himself search 11 B, Jatindra Mohan Avenue, but went to execute the search warrant at 191, Mahatma Gandhi Road, where on the identification of P.W.4 he arrested the appellant Bhagwandeo Tiwari.
After the above judgment was delivered Review Petition No.
He then companyducted the search of the premises in the presence of the witnesses and took into possession one Rokar, one khata bahi, one nakal bahi, the attendance register and three account slips which he marked 8, 9 and 10 Ext.
The evidence of P.W. 4 impresses us and there is numberreason why we should number place reliance on his evidence.
on October 25, 1958.
