Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

FINAL ARGUMENTS 7 Learned PP for CBI has contended that there is sufficient oral and documentary evidence on record and submitted that the accused are liable to be convicted for the offences in question.

7.1 Per contra, learned counsel on behalf of accused persons contended that there are various lapses in the case of the prosecution. He argued that the CBI merged the criminal proceedings and warrant trial (complaint) cases which was absolutely illegal and unwarranted. He strenuously argued that sanction under section 137 of the Customs Act has to be Digitally signed by NEETU NEETU NAGAR NAGAR Date:

7.2 It was thus contended on behalf of accused persons that section 61(2) of FERA is equivalent to section 137 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since the CBI has failed to comply with the mandatory requirement of section 137 of the Customs Act, 1962, cognizance taken was bad in law. Reliance was also placed on citation of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal appeal number 1097 of 2003 in case titled "Radhey Shyam Kejriwal versus State of West Bengal and another" vide its order dated 18.02.2011. 7.3 It was vehemently argued by learned defence counsel that no statement of accused persons were recorded under section 161 and 164 of Cr. P.C. as well as under section 107-108 of the Customs Act, 1962. No recovery is affected from accused persons as such from their person, office or residence etc. It was highlighted that the witnesses are hostile in nature and there is Digitally signed by NEETU NEETU NAGAR NAGAR Date: