Judgment

SARKAR, J. : These two matters have been heard together as they raise a common question. One of these matters is a petition under Art. 32 of the Constitution and the other, an appeal from a judgment of the High Court at Bombay.

2. The petitioner and the appellant were found by the Customs authorities, in proceedings under the Sea Customs Act, 1878, to have imported goods in breach of S. 19 of that Act. The petitioner had without authority imported gold of the value of Rs. 25,000 and the appellant, steel pipes of the value of Rs. 1,28,182. The Customs authorities by independent orders, imposed a penalty of Rs. 5,000 on the petitioner and of Rs. 25,630 on the appellant for these offences, under item, 8 of the schedule to S. 167 of the Act. The Customs authorities further confiscated the petitioner s gold under the same provision. There was no order of confiscation of the steel pipes for reasons to which it is unnecessary to refer.

3. The appeal is against an order the result of which was to direct realisation of the penalty imposed on the appellant, by execution of a distress warrant. The petition challenges the validity of the order imposing the pecuniary penalty. Neither the