Statements of co-accused are relevant but not sufficient for establishing a charge in absence of independent evidence.

1. This is an application filed by the original accused 4 under S. 482 of the Cr. P.C. for quashing of process issued by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay in Case No. 28 / CW of 1986 whereunder the petitioner along with six others are sought to be prosecuted under S. 120 - B of the Penal Code read with S. 135 of the Customs Act .

2. The facts leading to the filing of the present application can be enumerated as under: -
On the 19th Mar., 1985 the original accused 2 and 3 were apprehended at the Sahar Air - port by the Customs Intelligence Officer when they were found to be carrying, foreign exchange. On their statements being recorded by the Customs Intelligence Officer, the original accused 1 who is the husband of the petitioner was apprehended at the domestic air - port and his statement was recorded separately. During the course of investigation the statements of accused 5 and 6 were recorded whereby it was revealed that the petitioner / original accused 4 was also concerned with the foreign exchange seized from the accused 2 and 3. Thereafter departmental show cause notices were issued and adjudication proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and others. After the departmental investigation was complete, the present complaint came to be filed in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Esplanade, Bombay on the 22nd Jan., 1986.

3. The allegations of the prosecution as against the petitioner are set out in paras 12, 13, 14, 16 and 18 of the said complaint. In substance it was alleged, as against the petitioner, that on the accused 5 and 6 being apprehended at Ahmedabad they admitted in their statements that they were working for accused No. 1 in Skyjet Aviation Pvt. Ltd. at Ahmedabad of which the accused 1 as also the petitioner were the owners. Accused 1 had called accused 5 and 6 to his residence on the 24th Feb., 1985 where accused 1 and 4 were present and accused 1 asked them to purchase U. S. Dollars and gave them an amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- to be carried to Bombay for the purpose of acquiring foreign exchange from one Noor Mohamed and Mahesh Marwari of Bombay. An amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- was placed in two V. I. P. suit - cases and the accused 1 and the petitioner told them that Indian currency given to them was to be utilised by them in Bombay for the purpose of acquiring U. S. Dollars. The accused 5 and 6 were given Indian Airlines tickets for their travel from Ahmedabad to Bombay on the 25th of Feb., 1985 in false names. Investigations further revealed that the accused 3 who was to carry the foreign exchange to Hongkong was supplied his air - ticket by the petitioner through M/s. Marcopia Travel P. Ltd., Bombay. In the statement of the accused 4 she admitted having a major share in M/s. Skyjet Aviation Pvt. Ltd. She knew accused 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7. She, however, denied that she had any connection with the acquisition and attempt to have foreign exchange. She admitted having arranged for the ticket for accused 3 through Marcopia Travel Pvt. Ltd. but explained that she did so as accused 3 was the customer of Skyjet Aviation Pvt. Ltd. of which she was a major shareholder. On the aforesaid allegations, the petitioner was sought to be prosecuted for being a party to a conspiracy to attempt to export foreign exchange outside the limits of India.

4. By the judgment and order dt. 30th Jan., 1986 the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was pleased to issue process against all the seven accused. Aggrieved by the said order of issue of process the original accused 7 filed in this Court Criminal Writ Petn. No. 702 of 1986 seeking to challenge the issue of process as against him and my brother Justice Kotwal by his judgment and