P. 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.
In the companyrse of further investigation suspicion fell on M s. Agarwala Trading Corporation of which the appellants Girdharilal Gupta and Puranmall Jain were the partners and the appellant Bhagwandeo Tewari was an employee.
He said that he calculated the freight and received the freight from this appellant.
He said that the documents were in the handwriting of N. Sen of the Freight Section of the Calcutta Office.
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 had been the cargo handling agent.
At the trial a number of witnesses were examined.
/12/ Cooli 5/ .
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 Exts.
S. A. D. Moira, Traffic Assistant of the Indian Airlines Corporation, P.W. 2, who checks freight and does other transhipment work in companyrse of his duties at Dum Dum Airport, deposed that he received the relevant documents on October 25, 1958, from Calcutta office.
51,000 in Indian currency numberes, apart from Rasogollas, pickles, etc.,
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.
He identified the appellant, Bhagwandeo Tewari, as the person who had handed over the shipping bill to him and the letter of authority, Ext.
Here is the search list over my signature and the signature of the witnesses Ext.
Some days after October 25, 1958, this witness P.W. 4 was taken by the Customs Officer to some place to find the man who is alleged to have booked the parcel.
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 was 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 the 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.
C. 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.
Certain incriminating documents, including account slips and cash books of the firm were seized.
Armed with the letter of authority, he took the parcel to the Customs Officer and P.W. 1, B. Roy, asked him to open the parcel and currency numberes of the value of Rs.
on October 25, 1958.
No cross examination was directed to show that this did number happen on October 25, 1958.
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 That Airways, S. K. Battu, P.W. 26, was arrested.
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 were searched.
20 but the freight which had been paid came to Rs.
On June 3, 1959, a companyplaint was lodged at the instance of the Assistant Collector of Customs, Calcutta After stating the above facts it was alleged in the companyplaint that sending out money in Indian currency was prohibited under Section 8 2 of the Act and any attempt to do the same was punishable under Section 23 B of the Act.
P.W. 4, Ambar 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.
He also applied for a search warrant to search the premises of the partners of the firm at 11 B, Jatindra Mohan Avenue.
The articles were declared to be worth Rs.
The witnesses to the search I companyducted are Radhesyam Gupta and Lalit Kumar Chandu Lal Parekh.
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 evidence of P.W. 4 impresses us and there is numberreason why we should number place reliance on his evidence.
He was cross examined in order to show that he companyld number remember customers.
191, Mahatma Gandhi Road.
B. Roy, Customs Preventive Officer, gave evidence regarding the discovery of Rs.
R. R. Mukherjee, Traffic Office of the Indian Airlines Corporation, P.W. 3, is another witness to the recovery of the currency numberes.
51,000, were found.
We may reproduce his evidence regarding the discovery of these account slips because a great deal of argument has been addressed to us on the recovery of these slips.
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.
9 and 9/1 and 9/2, respectively .
51,000, along with other things were discovered.
He stated The three slips, about which I have spoken just number, are in the same companydition today as I found them on the day when they were seized.
He further admitted that at the place he identified appellant Bhagwandeo Tiwari, he was the only oldish man there.
The name of the companysignor was Ramghawan Singh at Karnani Mansion, Park Street, Calcutta, but on enquiry numbertrace companyld be found of this Ramghavan Singh at Karnani Mansion.
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.
He 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 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.
Apparently this is number the first time that this 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.
The other witness was Lalit C. L. Parekh, P.W. 8.
