IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl Rev Pet No. 185 of 1998()
1. C.K.ALI
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE ASST.COMMISSIONER
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.SUNNY VARGHESE
For Respondent :SMT.NARAYANIKUTTY CHETTUR,ADDL.CGSC
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.R.UDAYABHANU
Dated :24/05/2007
O R D E R
K.R. UDAYABHANU, J.
CRL.R.P.NO.185 of 1998
DATED THIS THE 24th DAY OF MAY 2007
ORDER
The revision petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.19/1990 with
respect to the offence under Section 135(1) of the Customs Act and
85(1) of Gold (Control) Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.15,000/- and in
default to undergo simple imprisonment for four months for the
offence under Section 135(1) (i) of the Customs Act and to pay a fine
of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two
months for the offence under Section 85(1)(a) of Gold (Control)Act.
The accused/revision petitioner was also undergone pre-trial detention.
The prosecution case is that on 4-2-1989 at about 6 p.m.the accused
was found in possession of contraband gold biscuits and gold coins of
foreign origin, i.e. 4 gold biscuits and 11 gold coins, the estimated
value of which was found to be 1,84,192/-. Counsel for the revision
petitioner has only sought for leniency pointing out that the revision
petitioner is laid up and that he has lost his employment on account of
the criminal case and that he has been undergoing the travails of the
criminal proceedings for more than 1 = decades. It is also pointed
out that the import of gold has been made much liberalised
CRRP.185/1998 -2-
subsequently and that the seized quantity right now could have been
brought in without any hassles.
In the circumstances and in view of the fact that the offence
was detected on 4-2-1989 and that more than 17 years have elapsed
since the commencement of the proceedings and that the
accused/revision petitioner has been facing the proceeding so far and
also considering that the quantity involved is not that large, I find
that the sentence is liable to be modified. In the circumstances, the
sentence under Section 135(1) of the Customs Act is modified to
imprisonment already undergone and to pay a fine of Rs.30,000/- and
in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The
sentence imposed for the offence under Section 85(1)(a) of the Gold
Control Act, i.e. to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to undergo
simple imprisonment for two months is confirmed. The revision
petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
K.R.UDAYABHANU, JUDGE
ks. TRUE COPY
P.S.TO JUDGE
CRRP.185/1998 -3-
CRRP.185/1998 -4-
K.R.UDAYABHANU, J
====================
CRL.R.P.NO.185 OF 1998
ORDER
====================
24-05-2007
====================