Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

19. The view expressed by us is supported by the judgment of this Court in Mahinder Singh's case (supra). In that case, the detenu was detained with a view to preventing him from dealing in smuggled goods otherwise than by engaging in, transporting or concealing or keeping smuggled goods. The detenu had allowed his Import Export Code number to be used for smuggling goods from Dubai. This Court observed that there appears to be no overact by the detenu for smuggling goods or otherwise dealing with them other than by allowing his license to be used for the purpose of import. This Court observed that the detenu's activities are in the nature of abetment of smuggling activities by allowing the use of his Import Export Code number and there was no material to show that he dealt with the smuggled goods. Therefore, merely procuring Import Export Code was considered as abetting of smuggling of goods. In the present case also, the detenu has arranged for Import Export Code. His other activities pertain to clearance of the goods. There is nothing to indicate that the detenu had actually smuggled goods to India. There is no material to indicate that he had anything to do with the said goods prior to their landing in India.