R.V.RAVEENDRAN
MOHAMMED AJMAL (MAJOR) – Appellant
Versus
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE – Respondent
( 2 ) IT is necessary to refer to the facts leading to the impugned seizure. 2. 1. The petitioner claims that he travelled from Bombay to Bhatkal by a Maharashtra Luxury Bus and got down at Bhatkal on 18-2-1986 at about 19-15 hours, with three packages. When he got down from the bus, certain Officers of the Customs Department approached him and asked his name and address; petitioner furnished them and also produced two tickets showing his travel from Bombay to Bhatkal Thereupon the Superintendent of Customs informed the petitioner that he had reasonable belief that he was carrying smuggled goods and he was therefore asked
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.