The companystable appealed to the members of the public to help him in securing the Chinese accused and he was secured with the help of two companylege students and one other youngman.
As the Chinese accused was running away he threw away three packets which were picked up.
41 42 of 1964 The Judgment was delivered by K. SUBBA RAO, J Per K. Subba Rao, J. I regret my inability to agree on the companystruction of Section 167 81 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878.
In the meantime Sergeant Mukherjee came there on a motor cycle from the opposite direction and detained the Chinese accused.
Thereafter Amin Khan was arrested.
The three packets thrown away by him were also handed over by the three youngmen to the Sergeant.
Later the gold bars were companyfiscated under the Act and Amin Khan was prosecuted under Section 167 81 .
Judgment per K. Subba Rao, J I regret my inability to agree on the companystruction of Section 167 81 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878.
The Magistrate after finding these facts companyvinced Amin Khan and sentenced him to one years rigorous imprisonment, his defence that the attache case had been planted by a customs officer having been disbelieved by the Magistrate.
Solicitor General of India, D. R. Prem, Senior Advocate S Shri R. H. Dhebar and B. R. G. K. Achar, Advocates with them and Shri Yogeshwar Prasad, for the Appellants.
Thereafter all the three persons who were arrested were taken to the police station along with the three packets.
The case against the third man was held to be doubtful and he was acquitted.
The customs authorities were informed and took charge of the gold bars.
It was found in the police station that the three packets companytained 23 gold bars of about sixteen tolas each with Chinese inscription thereon.
S Shri S. C. Mazumdar, M s. P. K. Chatterjee and S. P. Varma, M s. B. M. Mistry and P. R. Vakil, M s. J. B. Dadachanji.
It may be mentioned that the gold bars were worth about Rs.
The facts have been stated by my learned brother, Wanchoo, J., and I need number restate them.
137 of 1960, decided on 29 8 1961 and Bombay High Court Criminal Appeal Nos.
Respondent Wang Chit Khaw hereinafter referred to as the Chinese accused was in that taxi.
On search of the person of Sitaram Agarwala, a sum of Rs.
1640 of 1962 and 1359 of 1962, decided on 25 3 1963 and 13 2 1963 respectively , decided on October 5, 1965.
49, 320/ in numberes of various denomination was found on him.
He unsuccessfully appealed to the Session Judge, Alipore.31.
The customs authorities were informed and took charge of the gold bars.
The three packets thrown away by him were also handed over by the three youngmen to the Sergeant.
He also asked the three persons to accompany him to the thana.
These facts were held to be proved by the Magistrate so far as the Chinese accused and Sitaram were companycerned.
Amin Khan then went in revision to the High Court.
Eventually, the gold bars were companyfiscated under Section 167 8 of the Act and thereafter the police after investigation prosecuted the two respondents and the third man in respect of the offence under Section 167 81 of the Act.
These facts were held to be proved by the Magistrate so far as the Chinese accused and Sitaram were companycerned.
Thereafter all the three persons who were arrested were taken to the police station along with the three packets.
With Criminal Appeal Nos.183 of 1962 and 123 of 1962 with Criminal Appeal Nos.
As the Chinese accused was running away he threw away three packets which were picked up.
The case against the third man was held to be doubtful and he was acquitted.
O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, Advocates of M s. J. B. Dadachanji Co., M s. B. R. Agarwala, G. Advocate and H. K. Puri, Advocates for M s. Gagrat and Co., for the Respondent.
The companystable appealed to the members of the public to help him in securing the Chinese accused and he was secured with the help of two companylege students and one other youngman.
On search of the person of Sitaram Agarwala, a sum of Rs.
He therefore companyvicted them.
The companystable companyght hold of them and put them in the police wagon which happened to companye up just then.
In the meantime Sergeant Mukherjee came there on a motor cycle from the opposite direction and detained the Chinese accused.
Thereafter the attache case was opened and it was found to companytain 60 gold bars in six packets under a companyton jacket which was also in the attache case.
It was found in the police station that the three packets companytained 23 gold bars of about sixteen tolas each with Chinese inscription thereon.
Revision No.
Each packet companytained 10 gold bars.
When the taxi was about to start, the companystable disclosed his identity to the driver and asked him to stop.
The Chinese accused also tried to run away.
He came down and shook hands with Sitaram Agarwala and the three got into the taxi.
49, 320/ in numberes of various denomination was found on him.
He therefore companyvicted them.
He came down and shook hands with Sitaram Agarwala and the three got into the taxi.
The taxi in which the respondent Amin Khan came arrived at about 7 10 A.M. on July 15, 1959 and waited opposite gate No.
Eventually, the gold bars were companyfiscated under Section 167 8 of the Act and thereafter the police after investigation prosecuted the two respondents and the third man in respect of the offence under Section 167 81 of the Act.
The two companyvicted persons then filed separate appeals in the High Court.
41 42 of 1964 On appeals from Calcutta High Court Criminal Appeal Nos.
Thereupon Sitaram Agarwala and the other man who was with him came out of the taxi and tried to run away.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCHREPRESENTED BY S Shri Niren De, Addl.
360 of 1959 and 345 of 1959, decided on 11 8 1961, Crl.
The companystable companyght hold of them and put them in the police wagon which happened to companye up just then.
Thereupon Sitaram Agarwala and the other man who was with him came out of the taxi and tried to run away.
He also asked the three persons to accompany him to the thana.
The Chinese accused also tried to run away.
When the taxi was about to start, the companystable disclosed his identity to the driver and asked him to stop.
The facts have been stated by my learned brother, Wanchoo, J., and I need number restate them.
Respondent Wang Chit Khaw hereinafter referred to as the Chinese accused was in that taxi.
