The Court determined that currency seized was not subject to confiscation as there was insufficient evidence of intended export, thus limiting authorities under relevant statutes.

1. Both these appeals arise from the decision of Mahajan, J. in Civil Writ Petition No. 300 - D of 1958 on the file of the Delhi Circuit Bench of the High Court of Punjab. That was a petition presented under Art.226 of the Constitution by Beopari Mal, the appellant in L. P. A. No. 33 - D of 1965, seeking to get quashed the order of the Collector of Central Excise and Land Customs. New Delhi, made on July 25, 1958, in C. No. VIII (Hqrs) DLH / 10/26/58/56774 on his file wherein the Collector not only confiscated the sum of Rs. 56,225-6-0 seized from two G.R.P. constables Jethusingh and Hari Singh on January 3, 1957, but also imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000 on Beopari Mal and Rs. 1,000 on each of the two remaining accused Jethusingh and Hari Singh.
The learned single judge sustained the order of confiscation and quashed that Order imposing penalty on Beopari Mal. In L. P. A. No. 33 - D of 1965 Beopari Mal challenges the correctness as well as the legality of the order of the learned single judge sustaining the confiscation of Rs. 56,225-6-0'. In L. P. A. No. 43 - D of 1965, the Union of India and the Collector of Central Excise and Land Customs, New Delhi, seeks to get rid of the order of the learned single judge quashing the order relating to penalty.

2. In this Court, Sri B. R. L. Iyengar who appeared for Beopari Mal by and large did not contest the correctness of the facts found by the Collector. But his submission was that on the basis of the facts found by him, there is no basis for his conclusion that Jethusingh and Hari Singh were attempting to export Indian Currency to Pakistan. His further contention was that even if it is held that the Collector was justified in concluding that Jethusingh and Hari Singh were attempting to export Indian currency to Pakistan in that event also, no order under S.167(8) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 , (to be hereinafter referred to as the Sea Customs Act) could have been passed.

3. The facts found by the Collector, the correctness of which was not disputed before us, are these : Acting on reliable information, the Superintendent, Land Customs, Barmer, organised a raid on the incoming Jodhpur Barmer train on the early morning of January 3, 1957. During that raid, he recovered Rs. 56,225-6-0 from the two G. R. P. constables Jethusingh and Hari Singh. He also recovered from them a multi - pocket jacket containing a number of account slips and letters. On the basis of the informtion got from those slips, raid were carried out on the business and residential premises of Beopari Mal. During those raids, incriminating articles were recovered which showed that Beopari Mal in collusion with the two constables mentioned above was smuggling gold from Pakistan and selling the same in India. On the basis of the above facts, the Collector came to the conclusion that the constables were attempting to clandestinely export Indian currency to Pakistan. He accordingly ordered the confiscation of the currency seized under S.23 - A of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 , read with S.19 and S.167(8) of the Sea Customs Act.

4. The principal question for consideration is whether on the facts found by the Collector, there was any basis for concluding that the constables mentioned above were attempting to smuggle Indian currency into Pakistan. It may be noted that Banner is about 80 miles from the Pakistan border. From the records we get it that Beopari Mal is residing at Barmer. Hence it is not at all unlikely that the constables were getting back the sale proceeds of the smuggled gold after selling the same, to be paid