Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. The respondent pleaded not guilty and denied that he attempted to export the silver in the manner suggested by the prosecution. He denied that he made statements Ex. P3 to P6 before the Customs Officers. He also denied involvement of Mansoor. Mansoor also denied that he was exporting the silver.

3. The prosecution examined Gaonkar (P.W. 1) Preventive Officer of Customs, S. R. Vichare, Preventive Officer of Customs (P.W. 2), Kazi Kamar Sadruddin, Superintendent of Customs (P.W. 3), V. V. Vakatkar, Preventive Officer of Customs (P.W. 4) and N. S. Kardak, Selection Grade Preventive Officer (P.W. 5) Mahalingam Ramkrishnan (P.W. 6) employee of the Carting Agent. The learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate held that the retracted confessional statements of the respondents accused are not corroborated by an independent evidence and it would not be safe to base conviction on retracted confessional alone without independent corroboration. The prosecution failed to prove that the respondent had canceled silver bars in the petrol tank of the car and attempted to export silver. He also held that there was no evidence except the retracted confessional statements against accused No. 2. Consequently, both the accused were acquitted. However, in this appeal the acquittal of respondent is challenged.