Confessions obtained from an accused person who is not in custody and who has not been subjected to any inducement, threat or promise are voluntary and admissible in evidence.

Headnote:
CUSTOMS ACT - IMPORTATION AND POSSESSION OF GOLD - CONFESSIONS - VOLUNTARINESS - CORROBORATION - SECTION 104(2) OF THE CUSTOMS ACT, 1962 - SECTION 24 OF THE EVIDENCE ACT, 1872.
Fact of the Case:

Two accused persons were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thana, of offences relating to the illegal importation and possession of 6920 Tolas of gold, under Section 135 of the Customs Act 1962 as well as under Section 23 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947.
Finding of the Court:

1. The confessions of the accused persons were not obtained under compulsion and were, therefore, voluntary. 2. The confessions of the accused persons were corroborated by other evidence in the case. 3. The accused persons were guilty of the offences of which they had been convicted.
Issues: 1. Whether the confessions of the accused persons were obtained under compulsion and were, therefore, involuntary. 2. Whether the confessions of the accused persons were corroborated by other evidence in the case. 3. Whether the accused persons were guilty of the offences of which they had been convicted.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The accused persons were not in custody at the time their confessions were recorded. 2. There was no evidence to suggest that the confessions were obtained by any inducement, threat or promise. 3. The confessions were corroborated by the evidence of the raiding party, the panchas, and the seizure of the gold. 4. The accused persons had failed to offer any reasonable explanation for their possession of the gold.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction of both the accused as well as the sentences passed upon them by the lower court were confirmed.

JUDGMENT - Vimadalal, J.

1. This is an appeal filed by two accused persons who have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Thana, of offences relating to the illegal importation and possession of 6920 Tolas of gold, under Section 135 of the Customs Act 1962 as well as under Section 23 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947. It may be mentioned that the accused were also charged under R. 126-P of the Defence of India (Amend- ment) Rules, 1963, but were acquitted of that offence.

2. The facts of the prosecution case are that one Jokhi who was, at the material time, an Assistant Collector of Customs, at Bombay, received some information on the night of 21st March 1965 that gold was going to be smuggled into India from a place near the bridge on the Bassein Vajreshwart Road, that he, therefore, contacted witness Wagh who was then working as Deputy Superintendent under him, and the said Jokhi, accompanied by Wagh and two inspectors named Jadhav and Surti and a constable of that department, left Vadala at about 10 p.m. and reached Bassein at about 1-30 a.m., that they stopped their car near railway crossing along the Bassein-Vajreshwari Road, and stopped facing Vaireshwari side, after putting off the head-lights, somewhere near the wicket-gate of the level-crossing about 4 or 4 and half furlongs away from Bassein Station, that at about 2 a.m. they saw a car coming from the Vaireshwari side which came near the bridge and turned a little and put off its lights and went on to the kachcha road leading to the salt pans, that the Said car turned again and came towards the bridge, but halted after going off the road, that the said car waited there for about 10 or 15 minutes whereupon the raiding party started their vehicle to go to see what the matter was, that in the meantime that car had come on to the main road and the raiding party, therefore, intercepted the car by placing their own car across the road, and that all the persons from the raiding party then, got down and went up to that car. The prosecution story is that, apart from the driver who was at the wheel of that car, accused Nos. 1 and 2 were sitting on the rear side, that Wagh and Jokhi questioned them as to why they had come there, and in the beginning they did not give any reply, but later on accused No. 2 stated that there was gold in the dicky of the car and that the raiding party then opened the dicky and found that there were four gunny bags which were wet and soiled and were heavy. The prosecution story further is that Jokhi then sent Wagh to get two panchas from Bassein Town which he did and the dicky was opened and the gunny bags shown to the panchas, as also the marks of the tyres on the kachcha road along which that car had proceeded, as already stated above, but Jokhi and Wagh ultimately decided that it would not be safe to open the bundles and make a panchnama in a lonely place like the one in which they were, and they, therefore, decided that they should go to their office in Bombay with the panchas where the property in question should be opened and taken charge of under a panchnama. Inspector Surti, Jadhav and Assistant Collector Jokhi sat in the car in which the accused were travelling, and the rest of the raiding party proceeded in their own car and the two cars reached Churchgate at about 9 a. m. The said bundles were then opened in the presence of the panchas and were found to contain 6920 Tolas of gold with foreign markings and the panchnama which was made was concluded at about 2 p.m. on the 22nd of March 1965. The said bundles of gold, together with the car, were then sent to Superintendent Robb who took investigation of the case, he being the officer authorized to record statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. He first recorded the statement of the driver of the said car Bapu. and thereafter at about 4 p.m. he started recording the statement of accused No. 2 which he concluded at about 5 p.m. He then proceeded to record the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document