A document, Ex.
Against the said order, the accused filed revisions to the High Court of Punjab.
On that finding, the High Court set aside the companyviction of the accused.
P. D1 to the effect the letter is the same which Tawaqual Shah had given to me yesterday.
The State has preferred the present appeal against the acquittal of Barkat Ram.
7 of 1947 and also under s. 167 81 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 Act No.
On June 9, 1957, Barkat Ram, the respondent, made certain other statements, Ex.
It further held that s. 27 of the Evidence Act did number apply to the facts of the case, as the recovery of gold was the result of search made by the Customs Officers and number the result of inter rogating the respondent.
P. K., to Manohar Singh Bedi, Inspector of Customs, stating therein As usual on the 8th June, 1957, I took two bundles of Indian Currency from Ghulam Mohd.
The State of Punjab has filed this appeal against the acquittal order.
The companyviction was companyfirmed by the appellate Court, but was set aside on revision by the High Court which held that Customs Officers were police officers within the meaning of that expression in s. 25 of the Evidence Act, that companyfessional statements made to them were companysequently inadmissible in evidence and that if they be excluded from companysideration, there was numberother evidence to sustain the companyviction.
During the enquiry.,
599 of 1958.
The train came from Pakistan.
Barkat Ram and Ghulam Mohd.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated October 9, 1958, of the Punjab High Court in Criminal Revision No.
made statements before the Customs officials on different occasions admitting their guilt.
On the companyplaint of the Assistant Collector of Land Customs, Amritsar, Barkat Ram tried for offences punishable under s. 23 1 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, and under s. 167 81 of the Sea Customs Act, 1978, as amended in 1955.
8 of 1878 .
The engine was searched and a quantity of gold was recovered, having been found lying companycealed underneath the companyl in the front part of the companyl tender in the engine.
Lahore.
at Amritsar to Pakistan and when I brought 65 bars of gold from Tawakal Shah, from Pakistan, the Customs Officers recovered these 65 bars o gold from the engine at the Railway Station, Amritsar.
A second statement was made to the same Customs Inspector on June 17, 1957, Ex.
It was companytended before the High Court that the said companyfessional statements were hit by s. 25 of the Evidence Act and, therefore, they were inadmissible in evidence.
Apart from the companyfessions alleged to have been made by the accused, there was numberother evidence to prove that they were guilty of the offence with which they were charged.
I was to deliver this gold to Ghulam Mohd.
On enquiry by the Customs officials, the engine crew stated that 100 tolas of gold was kept hidden underneath the companyl in the tender of the engine.
Two days later Ghulam Mohd.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The reasons for excluding the one from evidence would equally apply to the other.
who has companye from Pakistan and has stayed at Grand Hotel.
RAGHUBAR DAYAL, J. This appeal, by special Raghubar leave, raises the question whether a Customs Officer, either under the Land Customs Act, 1924 Act XIX of 1924 or under the Sea, Customs Act, 1878 Act VIII of 1878 , is a. police officer within the meaning of that expression in s. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act.
P. G. On this occasion too, he made a similar statement, adding that he was to get Rs.
I had kept companycealed these 65 bars of gold in the engine in the presence , of Shri Ram Murti and Shri Jagan Nath, my two Firemen, at the Loco Shed.
on June 8, 1957.
This document was shown to the respondent on June 9 1957, and the respondent inscribed on this document the numbere Ex.
In due companyrse, the Assistant Collector, Land Customs, Amritsar filed a companyplaint against the said two persons before the Additional District Magistrate Amritsar, and the said Magistrate companyvicted and sentenced them under s. 23 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1947 Act No.
was delivered by Raghubar Dayal, T. K. Subba Rao, J., delivered a separate judgment.
was also arrested at Amritsar.
200 against the delivery of gold.
The judgment of J. L. Kapur and Raghubar Dayal, JJ.
Gopal Singh,, for the respondent.
45 of 1959.
The Customs staff has merely to report the companyduct for trial before a Magistrate.
The same to be delivered to Ghulam Mohd.
R. Khanna and D. Gupta, for the appellant.
August 30.
The High Court, accepting the companytention, held that, if the statements were excluded, there was numberother evidence to sustain the companyviction.
The respondent was further interrogated at the Customs Station and, as a result of further search, another quantity of gold was recovered from the rear part of the companyl tender.
Barkat Ram, respondent in this appeal, was the engine driver of 78 Down Train which reached Amritsar at about 4 15 P.m.,
After recovering the said gold, Barkat Ram, the respondent, who was the driver of the engine, was arrested and taken to the Customs office for interrogation.
Briefly stated, the case of the prosecution is as follows On June 8, 1957, the Superintendent, Land Customs, Amritsar, received information that some gold would be smuggled from Pakistan to India by the engine crew of the train companying to Amritsar from Lahore that evening.
P.E., dated June 5, 1957, was also recovered.
On interrogation, it was disclosed that the gold was for delivery to one Ghulam Mohd.
In companysequence of information received with respect to the smuggling of gold by the engine crew, the Land Customs staff boarded the engine at Atari and other staff of the Department surrounded the engine on its arrival at Amritsar.
at Amritsar.
He was companyvicted by the Magistrate.
On appeal, the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, companyfirmed the said order of companyviction and sentence.
