Retracted Confession alone Insufficient to Prove Guilt in Customs Smuggling Cases: CESTAT [Read Order]

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ), Allahabad set aside a smuggling conviction, stating that a retracted confession alone is insufficient to prove guilt in such cases. The judgment came after the accused, who had initially confessed to the crime, later retracted the statement claiming it was made under duress and pressure from the customs officials.

The appellants, Shri Raj Kumar Singh, the proprietor of M/s Bunti Scrap Suppliers and Shri Harishchandra Singh, represented by Ms Surabhi Sinha argued that their confession was retracted and made under duress, asserting that the prosecution’s reliance solely on this confession was insufficient to establish guilt. They also contended that without corroborative evidence, the confession lacked credibility and could not be the foundation of a conviction.

The Future of Tax and Finance: Upskill with Us, Click here

The respondent revenue, Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise & CGST, Lucknow, represented by Shri A.K. Choudhary maintained that the initial confession was voluntary and reflected the truth of the smuggling offence.

They argued that the retraction did not diminish the authenticity of the confession and that the absence of corroborative evidence should not invalidate the confession, which was sufficient for a conviction.

The bench pointed out that retracted confessions carry a presumption of unreliability unless supported by independent corroborative evidence. In the case under review, the prosecution had based its entire case on the confession, which was not backed by physical evidence or credible witness testimony.

The Future of Tax and Finance: Upskill with Us, Click here

The bench stressed that the law does not allow a conviction solely based on a confession unless it is corroborated by material evidence. The retraction of the accused raised reasonable doubts about the voluntary nature of the confession, prompting the CESTAT to rule in favour of acquittal.

The judgment also stressed the principles of justice and safeguards against wrongful convictions in smuggling cases where confessions can sometimes be coerced or influenced, the need for substantial, independent proof has been highlighted.

The two-member bench of the CESTAT comprising Mr. P.K. Choudhary (Judicial Member) and Mr. Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical Member) concluded that customs authorities must gather solid, corroborative evidence to substantiate claims of smuggling. Mere reliance on a retracted confession cannot be the foundation of a conviction.

The Future of Tax and Finance: Upskill with Us, Click here

In the confessions, particularly in sensitive cases such as smuggling, human rights violations and undue pressure can distort justice. It calls for more rigorous standards of proof in such high-stakes cases.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates