the judgment of the companystitutional bench dealingwith those appeals has upheld the validity of s.178a and so the principal point which the appellant wanted to raise before this companyrt is number companycluded against him.
it was urged by him in support of his petit ion inter alia that s. 178a of the sea customs act was unconstitutional in that it infringed the appellants fundamental right under art.
the appellant then applied for and obtained a certificate from the said high companyrt and it is with the said certificate that he has companye to this companyrt for challenging the companyrectness of the order passed by the high companyrt by which the companyfiscation of gold in question has been held to be valid.
the high companyrt rejected the appellants challenge to the validity of s. 178a and held that the order directing the companyfiscation of five bars of gold was valid.
the appellant sent a reply and thereupon the companylector of central excise held an enquiry.
appeal from the judgment and order dated march 20 1959 of the bombay high companyrt at nagpur in special civil application number 322 of 1958.
that question has in the meanwhile been decided by this companyrt on september 25 1961 in civil appeals number.
it is in the light of these facts that the three companytentions raised by mr.
bobde fall to be companysidered in the present appeal.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar j. on the 26th july 1958 the companylector of central excise nagpur passed an order directing absolute confiscation of five bars of gold weighing 290.6 tolas found in the possession of the appellant pukhraj and imposing upon him a personal penalty of rs.
port of his plea.
25000/ on the appellant was invalid and so the said direction was sot aside and a writ issued in that behalf.
408 to 410 of 1960 and other companion appeals.
documentary evidence in the form of account books was also produced by the appellant in sup.
on october 25 1956 whilst he was travelling by the passenger train from calcutta on the calcuttanagpur route he was searched at raigarh railway station and found to be in possession of five pieces of gold bullion weighing 290.6 tolas valued at rs.
it was also.
the main point on which the certificate was granted by the high companyrt to the appellant was in regard to the constitutional validity of a. 178a.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 511 of 1960.
at the enquiry the appellant appeared by companynsel and examined four witnesses in support of his plea that he was in possession of gold which belonged to him and which was number smuggled gold at all.
c. mathur and p. d. menumber for the respondents.
226 and 227 of the companystitution on september 15 1958.
by this petition the appellant claimed a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing the impugned order.
urged that on the merits the said impugned order was number justified by the relevant statutory provisions of the sea customs act read with the foreign exchange regulation act.
the collector of central excise disbelieved the evidence adduced by the appellant and came to the companyclusion that the presumption arising under s.178 of the sea customs act had number .been rebutted by the appellant and so he proceeded to pass the impugned order companyfiscating gold and imposing on the appellant a personal penalty of rs.25000/ .
the appellant is a goldsmith by profession and owns a gold and silver shop at rajnandgaon in madhya pradesh.
aggrieved by the said order the appellant filed a writ petition in the high companyrt of bombay at nagpur under arts.
march 15.
the said gold was then seized by the officer companycerned acting on a reasonable belief that it was smuggled gold and numberice was issued against the appellant on may 20 1957 calling upon him to show cause why action should number be taken against him for having contravened the numberification issued by the government of india number 12 11 f.1/48 dated august 26 1948 under the foreign exchange regulation act 1947 read with s.23a of the said act and s.19 of the sea customs act and punishable under item 8 of s.167 of the sea customs act.
19 1 1 and g of the companystitution.
25000/ under s. 167 8 of the sea customs act 1878 read with a. 19 of the said act and s. 23 a of the foreign exchange regulation act 1947.
s. bobde and ganpat rai for the appellant.
