ORDER
Smt. Archana Wadhwa
1. The prayer in the application is for dispensing with the condition of predeposit of penalty amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-(rupees two lakh) imposed upon the appellant under the provisions of section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. After hearing Shri K.K.Bhattacharjee, ld.consultant and Shri D.K.Bhowmik, ld.JDR I find that the penalty has been imposed upon the appellant based upon the statements of one Shri Rajendra Prasad Meena from whom eight gold bars of foreign origin were recovered. The said statement is to the effect that gold bars were to be delivered to the appellant. The appellant’s residential premises did not result in recovery of any contraband. the adjudicating authority has only gone by the fact that the appellant was neighbour of shri Meena who was staying in the house of one Shri Kamal Jain and was friendly to Shri Kamal Jain. He has also observed that Shri Vinod Jain keeps on moving between shillong and Guwahati. However, I find that these factors cannot be given the status of evidences against the appellant so as to impose penalty upon him. It is well settled that the statement of a co-accused should not be made the sole basis for conviction unless there is some corroboration from independent sources. There being nothing in the present case I find a strong prima facie case in favour of the appellant and allow the stay petition unconditionally and fix the appeal on 7.9.2001.
Dictated in the court.