SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(SC) 542

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. AHMADI AND S.C. AGRAWAL, JJ.
Kamarunnissa, Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and another, Respondents.
Writ Petn. (Cri.) Nos. 757, 759 and 760 of 1990 with Special Leave Petn. (Cri.) Nos. 731, to 733 of 1990

Decided on 14-9-1990.
WITH
Badhrunissa, Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and another, Respondents.
WITH
Sithy Aysha, Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and another, Respondents.

Advocates:
A.SUBBA RAO, KAPIL SIBAL, N.Devrajan, V.KRISHNAMURTHY

Headnote:

Customs Act, 1962 - Section 108, 3(1) and 9(1) – Offence of involved in smuggling activities - Detention orders - Three persons were intercepted by officers of Department of Revenue Intelligence at International Airport, as they were suspected to be involved in smuggling activities - They were escorted to office of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Waldorf, Colaba, Bombay, where they were interrogated - Other two persons were found to have swallowed 100 capsules each containing foreign currency of the total value of Rs. 6,99,930/-. capsules were extracted from their person and currency was recovered and attached under a Panchnama - In addition thereto foreign currency of the value of Rs. 1,466.50 was also found on their person during their search and same too was attached and seized - Held, Detention orders clearly state that the power is being exercised with a view to preventing smuggling of goods referable to clause (i) of sub-section. Merely because the number of that clause is not mentioned, it can make no difference whatsoever - We were, however, told that declaration was communicated in first week of January 1990, a statement which was not contested on behalf of petitioners - In fact submission was not pursued after this fact was disclosed - We also see no merit in it. Lastly, it was said that authority had failed to take notice of retraction of statement recorded under Section 108 of Act, 1962 - In fact there is a specific reference to the retraction letter and subsequent letter of 19th October, 1989, wherein detenus stated that they had signed letter of 12th October, 1989 without knowing contents thereof and had in fact not disowned their earlier statement of 5th October, 1989 - It is clear from above that this challenge is also without substance - These were the only contentions urged at hearing of special leave petitions as well as writ petitions - Special leave petitions and Writ petitions dismissed.

JUDGMENT

AHMADI, J.:—Three persons, namely (1) M. M. Shahul Hameed alias Gani Aslam, (2) Haja Mohideen alias Shahul Hameed Asarudeen and (3) Naina Mohammed alias Raja Mohd. Zafar were intercepted by the officers of Department of Revenue Intelligence on 5th October, 1989 at the Sahar International Airport, Bombay, as they were suspected to be involved in smuggling activities. They were escorted to the office of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Waldorf, Colaba, Bombay, where they were interrogated. On interrogation it was found that M. M. Shahul Hameed was to board flight No. CX-750 to Hongkong while the other two were to proceed to Dubai by Emirate Flight No. E-5 10 on that day. The said three persons were searched. Two balloon covered rolls secreted in the rectum of M. M. Shahul Hameed were removed and were found to contain diamonds and precious stones weighing about 905.70 carats and 77.37 carats, respectively. The said diamonds and precious stones valued at about Rs. 70 lacs were attached under a Panchnama. In addition to the same foreign currency of the value of Rs. 10,706 was also recovered and attached. His passport was also seized.

2. The other two persons were found to have swallowed 100 capsules each containing foreign currency of the total value of Rs. 6,99,930/-. The capsules were extracted from their person and the currency was recovered and attached under a Panchnama. In addition thereto foreign currency of the value of Rs. 1,466.50 was also found on their person during their search and the same too was attached and seized. Their passports were also seized.

3. All the aforesaid three persons belonged to Village Namboothalai of District Ramnath, Tamilnadu. Their statements were recorded on the same day i.e. 5th October, 1989. M. M. Shahul Hameed disclosed that his cousin Kasim, owner of a film company at Madras, had offered him a sum of Rs. 4,000/- for smuggling diamonds, etc., to Hongkong. On his agreeing, he was trained and was sent to Bombay with one Mohammad who was to introduce him to Mohideen and Rahim who were supposed to entrust him with the diamonds, etc., to be carried to Hongkong. Accordingly he came to Bombay with the said Mohammad and was duly introduced to the aforesaid two persons at a flat in Chembur where he stayed. The said Mohideen and Rahim arranged for his passport and ticket and gave him two rolls wrapped in balloons containing diamonds, etc., on the night of 4th October, 1989 for being carried to Hongkong. As per the training he had received, he concealed these balloons in his rectum before leaving for the Airport to catch the flight to Hongkong. In addition to the same he was given a paper on which something was scribbled in Arabic. In the course of his interrogation he admitted the recovery and seizure of diamonds and precious stones and also gave the description of Kasim and Rahim. On 12th October, 1989 he wrote a letter retracting his statement made on 5th October, 1989. However, in his further statement recorded on 19th October, 1989 he admitted that his signature was obtained on the letter of 12th October, 1989 without disclosing the contents thereof to him and that his earlier statement of 5th October, 1989 was both voluntary and correct. Incidentally the statement of retraction was rejected by the Deputy Director of Revenue Intelligence on 20th October, 1989.

4. The other two persons whose statements were also recorded on 5th October, 1989 disclosed that they were both working at a Tea shop in Madras and knew Mohideen and Rahim who too were working with them. Rahim had suggested that they would be paid Rs. 2,000/- each if they were willing to smuggle foreign currency to Dubai by swallowing capsules containing the same. On their agreeing they too were trained and were then taken to Bombay where they were lodged in Vimi Lodge at Bhendi Bazar. On 4th October, 1989 they were given air tickets for travel to Dubai and 100 capsules each containing foreign currency. They swallowed the capsule






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top