SC Upholds Conviction In Foreign Watch Smuggling Case under Customs Act, Reduces Sentence To Period Already Undergone [Read Order]

The appellant's conviction in a case of smuggling foreign watches has been upheld by the Supreme Court of India in a case under Section 135(1)(b)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, but with a substantial relief in terms of reducing the sentence to the period already undergone.

The background of the case dates back to April 1985 when Customs officials at Gujarat, based on a specific intelligence, seized 777 foreign wrist watches and 879 watch straps worth about ₹2.22 lakh from hidden pits near a fisherman’s jetty. The watches included foreign brands such as Seiko, Citizen, and Ricoh.

Investigations showed that the smuggled goods were brought into India in a vessel belonging to and operated by some of the accused. More than one accused was involved in the act of concealing, storing, transporting and selling the smuggled goods.

A criminal case was filed in 1987, and the seven accused were convicted by the Trial Court in 2003 which was subsequently confirmed by the Sessions Court and the Gujarat High Court.

Before the Supreme Court the appellants argued that they were convicted largely on the basis of statements made under Section 108 of the Customs Act without independent corroboration. It was also argued that the statements were unreliable and that some of the accused persons had already spent a considerable period of time in jail.

Further,the appellants prayed for leniency on the grounds of advanced age, the fact that the case had dragged on for nearly four decades and that some of the co-accused persons had been acquitted or had died.

The Customs Department opposed the reduction of the sentence on the ground that the crime was organized smuggling and that a deterrent sentence was required.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against conviction on the ground that statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act are admissible and can be substantive evidence if voluntary, and that the statements were corroborated by recoveries and panchnamas.

However, while sentencing the Court took a compassionate view. Taking into account the long passage of time since the commission of the offence, partial acquittals, deaths of some of the accused and the one-year imprisonment already undergone the Court sentenced the accused to the already undergone period of imprisonment while upholding the conviction.

The judgment was pronounced by Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta.

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