Mohammed Sultan Sayyed Vs. State of Maharashtra thr. CBI
EmailAppeal: Criminal Appeal No. 2173 of 2010
Petitioner: Mohammed Sultan Sayyed
Respondent: State of Maharashtra thr. CBI
Apeal: Criminal Appeal No. 2173 of 2010
Judges: P. Sathasivam & B.S. Chauhan, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 21, 2013
Head Note:
CRIMINAL LAWS
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
Section 3(3) – Bombay Blast case – Accused A-90, a Superintendent of Custom, attended meeting with accused to facilitate landing of smuggled goods in lieu of illegal gratification – Confessional statement – Plea that confessional statement was not voluntary as CJM did not accept it and returned it and thus there was some manipulation – Designated Court found it voluntary as it was directly sent to it. Held statement was not a manufactured document.
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
Section 3(3) – Bombay Blast case – Accused A-90, a Superintendent of Custom, attended meeting with accused to facilitate landing of smuggled goods in lieu of illegal gratification – Confessional statement – Plea that confessional statement was not voluntary as CJM did not accept it and returned it and thus there was some manipulation – Designated Court found it voluntary as it was directly sent to it. Held statement was not a manufactured document.
Section 3(3) – Bombay Blast case – Accused, a Superintendent of Custom, in lieu of illegal gratification, attended meeting to facilitate landing of contraband – Also attended meeting at Hotel Big Splash where in A-17, Tiger Memon (AA) were also present to facilitate Shekhadi landing – Conviction. Held is maintained.
Held:
Plea that after recording A-90’s confessional statement, Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186) had sent it to the CJM, who had not accepted the same, and had returned it. Therefore, there was manipulation. Such an averment was rejected by the Designated Court, pointing out that the same had been sent directly by Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186) to the Designated Court, Pune, which had received it directly. Therefore, the question of any kind of manipulation did not arise. Thus, the confessional statement cannot be termed as a manufactured document, as has been claimed by appellant (A-90). (Para 404)
JUDGEMENT:
389. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 2.8.2007 passed by the Designated Court under the TADA for the Bombay Blast Cases, Greater Bombay, in Bombay Blast Case No. 1/1993, by which the appellant has been convicted under Section 3(3) TADA.
390. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that:
A. In addition to the main charge of conspiracy, the appellant (A-90) was charged for knowingly facilitating the commission of terrorist acts i.e. the bomb blast on 12.3.1993, and intentionally aiding and abetting Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar, Mohmed Dossa and Mushtaq @ Ibrahim @ Tiger Abdul Razak Memon and their associates by attending the meeting that was held at Hotel Persian Darbar on 6.1.1993 alongwith other co-accused Ranjit Kumar Singh (A-102), Baleshwar Prasad and Customs Superintendent Yashwant Balu Lotle (PW.154), wherein the said Customs agents agreed to allow Mohd. Dossa and his associates to carry out their smuggling activities upon the payment of a sum of over Rs.7,80,000/- per landing; in furtherance of which, Mohd. Dossa and his associates smuggled into Bombay, arms and ammunition for the commission of terrorist acts at Dighi on 9.1.1993. The appellant (A-90) and the other co-accused, facilitated the smuggling and transportation of arms, ammunition and explosives by their non-interference in lieu of the payment of bribe amounts, in spite of the fact that they had specific information and knowledge of the fact that arms, ammunition and explosives were to be smuggled into India by terrorists, and that as customs officers were legally bound to prevent the same. Charges were framed under Section 3(3) TADA.
B. After the conclusion of the trial, the learned Designated Court found the appellant (A-90), guilty of charge under Section 3(3) TADA, and imposed upon him, a punishment of 7 years alongwith a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further RI for 3 years. A cash amount of Rs.1,35,000/- from muddernal Art. No. 343 (B), 343(C) and 343(D) which was recovered from his house, has also been forfeited. However, he was not found guilty of any other offences.
Hence, this appeal.
391. Shri Mushtaq Ahmad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant (A-90), has submitted that there is no legal evidence on the basis of which the conviction of the appellant (A- 90), can be sustained. It was further submitted that his confessional statement has never been recorded, and that he had never been presented before the officer who is purported to have recorded his confessional statement, on the contrary, such recording was done by resorting to 3 rd degree methods, and that he was forced to sign the papers upon which his purported confessional statement was recorded. All the other evidence is not worthy of acceptance, as he had mostly met the other main accused only upon the instructions of R.K. Singh, Assistant Collector of Customs (A-102). Thus, the conviction is liable to be set aside, and the present appeal deserves to be allowed.
392. Shri Mukul Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the appeal and submitted that the appellant (A-90) had made an admissible confessional statement, and that no 3 rd degree methods were used to obtain the same. Thus, the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
393. We have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
394. Evidence against the appellant (A-90):
(a) Confessional statement of the appellant (A-90)
(b) Confessional statement of Dawood @ Dawood Taklya Mohammed Phanse @ Phanasmiyan (A-14)
(c) Confessional statement of Uttam Shantaram Potdar (A-30)
(d) Confessional statement of Mohmed Salim Mira Moiddin Shaikh @ Salim Kutta (A-134)
(e) Confessional statement of Mohmed Kasam Lajpuria @ Mechanic Chacha (A-136)
(f) Confessional statement of Sharif Abdul Gafoor Parkar @ Dadabhai (A-17)
(g) Deposition of Sitaram Maruti Padwal (PW-146)
(h) Deposition of Madhukar Krishna Dhandure (PW-153)
(i) Deposition of Yashwant Balu Lotale (PW-154)
(j) Deposition of Shivkumar Ramanand Bhardwaj (PW-470)
395. Confessional Statement of the appellant (A-90):
His own confessional statement was recorded on 29.4.1993 (First Part) and 30.4.1993 (Second Part) by Shri C. Prabhakar, Superintendent of Police, Thane Rural Camp, Alibagh (Raigad) (PW.186). In his confession, he has stated that he had been working as the Superintendent of Customs at Alibagh in January- February, 1993 and that he had accompanied the accused R.K. Singh, Assistant Collector of Customs (A-102) on 6.1.1993 to Hotel Persian Darbar, alongwith Shri Lotle (PW.154), where negotiations had taken place with the accused Mohd. Dossa and his associates, regarding the amounts that were to be paid to various officials for the landing of smuggled goods, and where it was finally settled that Mohd. Dossa would pay a sum of Rs.7,80,000/- for each landing. On 8.1.93, the appellant (A-90) had seen Mohd. Dossa, whom he had met on 6.1.1993, talking to R.K. Singh (A- 102) in his office. He was introduced by R.K. Singh (A-102) to Uttam Potdar (A-30), a landing agent, in the third week of January. R.K. Singh (A-102) had instructed the appellant (A-90) to approach Uttam Potdar (A-30), who had handed over one plastic box to the appellant (A-90), which he had given to R.K. Singh (A-102). R.K. Singh (A-102) had given a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the appellant (A-90) as part payment for the earlier landing made in the first week of December, 1992 and also for the one on 9.1.1993. For the said landings, R.K. Singh (A-102) had been paid a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs on 19.1.1993. The appellant (A-90) had gone to the rest house at Shrivardhan, and there he had met R.K. Singh (A- 102). At the said rest house, Dawood Phanse (A-14) had also met R.K. Singh (A-102). R.K. Singh (A-102) had given instructions to the appellant (A-90) on 2.2.1993, to reach Hotel Big Splash and contact Dadabhai Parkar (A-17), as he had told R.K. Singh (A-102) that a landing was likely to take place on 5/6.2.1993 at Bankot Creek. Subsequently, Dadabhai (A-17) informed him (A-102) that the work of the landing had been delayed as a dead body had been found at the said place. The appellant (A-90) had accompanied R.K. Singh (A-102) and Inspector Padwal on 12.2.1993, and all of them then reached the residence of Dadabhai Parkar (A-17), held a meeting with him and then returned to the Mhasla rest house, where Sarfaraz (A-55), son of Dawood Phanse (A-14) met R.K. Singh (A-102) and handed over to him a plastic bag containing Rs.3 lakhs. Uttam Potdar (A-30) had also come to the rest house and spoke to R.K. Singh (A-102). R.K. Singh (A-102) had given a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the appellant (A-90) on 13.2.1993, and had told him that the said money was being paid against the landing which had taken place on 3.2.1993 at Shekhadi. He further stated that the ill-gotten money amounting to Rs.1,35,000/- for a total of four landings, had been kept with the father-in- law of the appellant (A-90), Shamsuddin Rajinsaheb Inamdar.
396. Confessional statement of Dawood @ Dawood Taklya Mohammed Phanse @ Phanasmiyan (A-14):
He has revealed that a sum of Rs.3 lakhs was paid to the Alibagh Customs Office when the appellant (A-90) had visited his house on 14/15.2.1993 alongwith Inspector Padwal.
397. Confessional statement of Uttam Shantaram Potdar (A-30) :
He has revealed that he had been paying bribes to the appellant (A-90) and to various custom officers for each landing, and that he had also paid the staff of Shrivardhan Customs, a sum of Rs.1.5 lakh. A sum of Rs.3 lakhs had also been given to him by Firoz to distribute among all the other officers. The staff of Shrivardhan Customs made a complaint stating that the said amount was too low, and hence, the accused (A-30) had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- from his own pocket, for all, to Sayyed, Customs Superintendent, the appellant (A-90), Rs.2.5 lakhs to R.K. Singh (A-102) and Rs. 1 lakh to the Alibagh staff. He further revealed that the money that he had given to the appellant (A-90), was from his own share.
398. Confessional Statement of Mohmed Salim Mira Moiddin Shaikh @ Salim Kutta (A-134):
He has stated that in the first week of January, 1993, three custom officers, including R.K. Singh (A-102), Sayyed (A-90) and one other officer, had come to Hotel Persian Darbar where the said accused (A-134) was present with Mohd. Dossa, Mohd. Kaliya, Abdul Qayum and Mohd. Mental. Mohd. Dossa had discussed his landing operation and the amount that was to be paid for each landing as a bribe to them alongwith the customs officers. It was finally agreed, that a sum of seven to eight lakh rupees would be paid by Mohd. Dossa to the customs officers for each landing. The customs officers had also asked Mohd. Dossa to provide certain goods that could be shown as seized. Immediately thereafter, a landing took place for the purpose of which, the accused (A-134) went to the customs office at Alibagh. The appellant (A-90) was present at the office, and they informed the appellant (A-90) that Mohd. Dossas landing would take place at Dighi Jetty The appellant (A-90) went and called R.K. Singh (A-102) from his residence, and the accused (A-134) then told him about the landing. Both of them (A-90 and A-102), gave their permission for the same. In pursuance thereof, the said landing took place, and Uttam Potdar (A-30) made all the requisite arrangements. Four trucks participated in the landing operation.
399. Confessional statement of Mohmed Kasam Lajpuria @ Mechanic Chacha (A-136):
According to him, Mohd Dossa, Salim Kutta (A-134), Firoz Qayum Sajli, Arif Lambu and Mechanic Chacha (A-136) had gone from Panvel to Bombay and had attended a meeting at Hotel Persian Darbar. After sometime, customs officers R.K. Singh (A- 102), the appellant (A-90), and 4-5 other customs officials were preparing to leave office in a white Ambassador and a jeep. After their departure, he came to know from Mohd. Dossa, that in the aforementioned meeting, an amount of Rs.7-8 lakhs had been fixed for payment to customs officials as a bribe, for a single landing. Upon the instructions of Mohd. Dossa, this accused (A- 136) reached, alongwith the other accused from Bombay to Mhasla, Alibagh as the said landing was to take place there, on 9.1.1993. They had already been told to make all requisite arrangements for the same, alongwith Uttam Potdar (A-30), Shabbir Qadri after talking to R.K. Singh (A-102), the appellant (A-90) and also other customs officials.
400. Confessional statement of Sharif Abdul Gafoor Parkar @ Dadabhai (A-17):
He has disclosed facts in relation to the landing at Shekhadi. He was informed by Tiger Memon (AA) that a landing would take place on 3.2.1993. Additionally, Tiger Memon had told him to contact Assistant Collector R.K. Singh (A-102) over the phone, to tell him that he was an informant and that he wanted to provide to him certain information, for which he should come to Hotel Big Splash. R.K. Singh (A-102) told him that it was not possible for him to come there, but he would send his Superintendent and in pursuance thereof, the appellant (A-90) had gone there. Tiger Memon and co-accused (A-17) engaged in certain discussion, and Tiger Memon told him that there was some landing work on the said date. He further stated that they had received Rs.15 lakhs to be distributed among officers, as per the instructions of Dawood Takliya (A-14), out of which a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs was paid to R.K. Singh (A-102), Inspector Padwal and to the appellant (A-90).
401. Depositions of Sitaram Maruti Padwal(PW-146), Madhukar Krishna Dhandure (PW-153) and Yashwant Balu Lotale (PW-154) :
They are customs officials and have deposed and approved that Assistant Collector R.K. Singh (A-102) and the appellant (A- 90), alongwith other Custom officers of the Alibagh Division went to the Persian Darbar hotel. There was a meeting held at the said hotel, and there were talks held with Mohd. Bhai for about half an hour.
402. Deposition of Shivkumar Ramanand Bhardwaj (PW-470):
He has stated that in January 1993, he had received certain information from the DRI Bombay, to the effect that some ISI syndicates who were located in the Middle East and also in Bombay, may try to smuggle contraband and arms into the districts of Bombay, Raigad and Bassin. After receipt of said information, he had sent DO letter (Ext. 1536) to the Assistant Collector R.K. Singh (A-102) and others, and had also given instructions over the telephone. This DO letter was proved by Pradeep Kumar (PW- 471). The said letter was received by R.K. Singh (A-102) and this information was further circulated to all the Superintendents working under his jurisdiction.
403. In the statement made under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.), the appellant (A-90) has completely denied the recording of his confessional statement by Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186), while answering the questions put to him. The appellant (A-90) refused to acknowledge most of the incriminating material that was pointed out to him by the Designated Court. The Designated Court considered the same in great detail, appreciating it alongwith the cross-examination of Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186). The appellant (A-90) has further stated under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that in his confessional statement, his signatures were forcibly obtained on 1.5.1993, and subsequently on 3.5.1993 at a few places, when a sentence was inserted in the margin of page 3. The same were obtained in the office of SP T.S. Bhal, P.W.191, through force and by torturing the appellant (A-90).
404. However, after considering everything on record, the learned Designated Court came to the conclusion that there was no manipulation in his confessional statement, and that the same had voluntary been made by appellant (A-90). His explanation was that, after recording his confessional statement, Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186) had sent it to the CJM, who had not accepted the same, and had returned it. Therefore, there was manipulation. Such an averment was rejected by the Designated Court, pointing out that the same had been sent directly by Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186) to the Designated Court, Pune, which had received it directly. Therefore, the question of any kind of manipulation did not arise. Thus, the confessional statement cannot be termed as a manufactured document, as has been claimed by appellant (A-90).
405. The evidence on record leads to the conclusion that the appellant (A-90) had participated in the meetings held at Hotel Persian Darbar on 6.1.1993 in connection with landings. The appellant accepted a huge amount of money as his share of illegal gratification from co-accused R.K. Singh (A-102) permitting the other accused persons for landing on 9.1.1993, and part of the same had been recovered from the appellant. The appellant (A-90) also participated in the meeting at Hotel Big Splash, wherein Sharif Abdul Gafoor Parkar @ Dadabhai Parkar (A-17) and Tiger Memon (AA) were present and therein the negotiations took place for Shekhadi landing. As the said landing took place the involvement of the appellant becomes apparent.
405.1 The evidence further disclosed that the landings contained contraband goods i.e. sophisticated arms, ammunition and explosives and the same could not be used for any purpose other than commission of terrorist acts.
406. We find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the Designated Court. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
*****************
390. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that:
A. In addition to the main charge of conspiracy, the appellant (A-90) was charged for knowingly facilitating the commission of terrorist acts i.e. the bomb blast on 12.3.1993, and intentionally aiding and abetting Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar, Mohmed Dossa and Mushtaq @ Ibrahim @ Tiger Abdul Razak Memon and their associates by attending the meeting that was held at Hotel Persian Darbar on 6.1.1993 alongwith other co-accused Ranjit Kumar Singh (A-102), Baleshwar Prasad and Customs Superintendent Yashwant Balu Lotle (PW.154), wherein the said Customs agents agreed to allow Mohd. Dossa and his associates to carry out their smuggling activities upon the payment of a sum of over Rs.7,80,000/- per landing; in furtherance of which, Mohd. Dossa and his associates smuggled into Bombay, arms and ammunition for the commission of terrorist acts at Dighi on 9.1.1993. The appellant (A-90) and the other co-accused, facilitated the smuggling and transportation of arms, ammunition and explosives by their non-interference in lieu of the payment of bribe amounts, in spite of the fact that they had specific information and knowledge of the fact that arms, ammunition and explosives were to be smuggled into India by terrorists, and that as customs officers were legally bound to prevent the same. Charges were framed under Section 3(3) TADA.
B. After the conclusion of the trial, the learned Designated Court found the appellant (A-90), guilty of charge under Section 3(3) TADA, and imposed upon him, a punishment of 7 years alongwith a fine of Rs. 1 lakh, and in default of payment of fine, to suffer further RI for 3 years. A cash amount of Rs.1,35,000/- from muddernal Art. No. 343 (B), 343(C) and 343(D) which was recovered from his house, has also been forfeited. However, he was not found guilty of any other offences.
Hence, this appeal.
391. Shri Mushtaq Ahmad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant (A-90), has submitted that there is no legal evidence on the basis of which the conviction of the appellant (A- 90), can be sustained. It was further submitted that his confessional statement has never been recorded, and that he had never been presented before the officer who is purported to have recorded his confessional statement, on the contrary, such recording was done by resorting to 3 rd degree methods, and that he was forced to sign the papers upon which his purported confessional statement was recorded. All the other evidence is not worthy of acceptance, as he had mostly met the other main accused only upon the instructions of R.K. Singh, Assistant Collector of Customs (A-102). Thus, the conviction is liable to be set aside, and the present appeal deserves to be allowed.
392. Shri Mukul Gupta, learned senior counsel appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the appeal and submitted that the appellant (A-90) had made an admissible confessional statement, and that no 3 rd degree methods were used to obtain the same. Thus, the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
393. We have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
394. Evidence against the appellant (A-90):
(a) Confessional statement of the appellant (A-90)
(b) Confessional statement of Dawood @ Dawood Taklya Mohammed Phanse @ Phanasmiyan (A-14)
(c) Confessional statement of Uttam Shantaram Potdar (A-30)
(d) Confessional statement of Mohmed Salim Mira Moiddin Shaikh @ Salim Kutta (A-134)
(e) Confessional statement of Mohmed Kasam Lajpuria @ Mechanic Chacha (A-136)
(f) Confessional statement of Sharif Abdul Gafoor Parkar @ Dadabhai (A-17)
(g) Deposition of Sitaram Maruti Padwal (PW-146)
(h) Deposition of Madhukar Krishna Dhandure (PW-153)
(i) Deposition of Yashwant Balu Lotale (PW-154)
(j) Deposition of Shivkumar Ramanand Bhardwaj (PW-470)
395. Confessional Statement of the appellant (A-90):
His own confessional statement was recorded on 29.4.1993 (First Part) and 30.4.1993 (Second Part) by Shri C. Prabhakar, Superintendent of Police, Thane Rural Camp, Alibagh (Raigad) (PW.186). In his confession, he has stated that he had been working as the Superintendent of Customs at Alibagh in January- February, 1993 and that he had accompanied the accused R.K. Singh, Assistant Collector of Customs (A-102) on 6.1.1993 to Hotel Persian Darbar, alongwith Shri Lotle (PW.154), where negotiations had taken place with the accused Mohd. Dossa and his associates, regarding the amounts that were to be paid to various officials for the landing of smuggled goods, and where it was finally settled that Mohd. Dossa would pay a sum of Rs.7,80,000/- for each landing. On 8.1.93, the appellant (A-90) had seen Mohd. Dossa, whom he had met on 6.1.1993, talking to R.K. Singh (A- 102) in his office. He was introduced by R.K. Singh (A-102) to Uttam Potdar (A-30), a landing agent, in the third week of January. R.K. Singh (A-102) had instructed the appellant (A-90) to approach Uttam Potdar (A-30), who had handed over one plastic box to the appellant (A-90), which he had given to R.K. Singh (A-102). R.K. Singh (A-102) had given a sum of Rs.1 lakh to the appellant (A-90) as part payment for the earlier landing made in the first week of December, 1992 and also for the one on 9.1.1993. For the said landings, R.K. Singh (A-102) had been paid a sum of Rs.3.5 lakhs on 19.1.1993. The appellant (A-90) had gone to the rest house at Shrivardhan, and there he had met R.K. Singh (A- 102). At the said rest house, Dawood Phanse (A-14) had also met R.K. Singh (A-102). R.K. Singh (A-102) had given instructions to the appellant (A-90) on 2.2.1993, to reach Hotel Big Splash and contact Dadabhai Parkar (A-17), as he had told R.K. Singh (A-102) that a landing was likely to take place on 5/6.2.1993 at Bankot Creek. Subsequently, Dadabhai (A-17) informed him (A-102) that the work of the landing had been delayed as a dead body had been found at the said place. The appellant (A-90) had accompanied R.K. Singh (A-102) and Inspector Padwal on 12.2.1993, and all of them then reached the residence of Dadabhai Parkar (A-17), held a meeting with him and then returned to the Mhasla rest house, where Sarfaraz (A-55), son of Dawood Phanse (A-14) met R.K. Singh (A-102) and handed over to him a plastic bag containing Rs.3 lakhs. Uttam Potdar (A-30) had also come to the rest house and spoke to R.K. Singh (A-102). R.K. Singh (A-102) had given a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the appellant (A-90) on 13.2.1993, and had told him that the said money was being paid against the landing which had taken place on 3.2.1993 at Shekhadi. He further stated that the ill-gotten money amounting to Rs.1,35,000/- for a total of four landings, had been kept with the father-in- law of the appellant (A-90), Shamsuddin Rajinsaheb Inamdar.
396. Confessional statement of Dawood @ Dawood Taklya Mohammed Phanse @ Phanasmiyan (A-14):
He has revealed that a sum of Rs.3 lakhs was paid to the Alibagh Customs Office when the appellant (A-90) had visited his house on 14/15.2.1993 alongwith Inspector Padwal.
397. Confessional statement of Uttam Shantaram Potdar (A-30) :
He has revealed that he had been paying bribes to the appellant (A-90) and to various custom officers for each landing, and that he had also paid the staff of Shrivardhan Customs, a sum of Rs.1.5 lakh. A sum of Rs.3 lakhs had also been given to him by Firoz to distribute among all the other officers. The staff of Shrivardhan Customs made a complaint stating that the said amount was too low, and hence, the accused (A-30) had paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- from his own pocket, for all, to Sayyed, Customs Superintendent, the appellant (A-90), Rs.2.5 lakhs to R.K. Singh (A-102) and Rs. 1 lakh to the Alibagh staff. He further revealed that the money that he had given to the appellant (A-90), was from his own share.
398. Confessional Statement of Mohmed Salim Mira Moiddin Shaikh @ Salim Kutta (A-134):
He has stated that in the first week of January, 1993, three custom officers, including R.K. Singh (A-102), Sayyed (A-90) and one other officer, had come to Hotel Persian Darbar where the said accused (A-134) was present with Mohd. Dossa, Mohd. Kaliya, Abdul Qayum and Mohd. Mental. Mohd. Dossa had discussed his landing operation and the amount that was to be paid for each landing as a bribe to them alongwith the customs officers. It was finally agreed, that a sum of seven to eight lakh rupees would be paid by Mohd. Dossa to the customs officers for each landing. The customs officers had also asked Mohd. Dossa to provide certain goods that could be shown as seized. Immediately thereafter, a landing took place for the purpose of which, the accused (A-134) went to the customs office at Alibagh. The appellant (A-90) was present at the office, and they informed the appellant (A-90) that Mohd. Dossas landing would take place at Dighi Jetty The appellant (A-90) went and called R.K. Singh (A-102) from his residence, and the accused (A-134) then told him about the landing. Both of them (A-90 and A-102), gave their permission for the same. In pursuance thereof, the said landing took place, and Uttam Potdar (A-30) made all the requisite arrangements. Four trucks participated in the landing operation.
399. Confessional statement of Mohmed Kasam Lajpuria @ Mechanic Chacha (A-136):
According to him, Mohd Dossa, Salim Kutta (A-134), Firoz Qayum Sajli, Arif Lambu and Mechanic Chacha (A-136) had gone from Panvel to Bombay and had attended a meeting at Hotel Persian Darbar. After sometime, customs officers R.K. Singh (A- 102), the appellant (A-90), and 4-5 other customs officials were preparing to leave office in a white Ambassador and a jeep. After their departure, he came to know from Mohd. Dossa, that in the aforementioned meeting, an amount of Rs.7-8 lakhs had been fixed for payment to customs officials as a bribe, for a single landing. Upon the instructions of Mohd. Dossa, this accused (A- 136) reached, alongwith the other accused from Bombay to Mhasla, Alibagh as the said landing was to take place there, on 9.1.1993. They had already been told to make all requisite arrangements for the same, alongwith Uttam Potdar (A-30), Shabbir Qadri after talking to R.K. Singh (A-102), the appellant (A-90) and also other customs officials.
400. Confessional statement of Sharif Abdul Gafoor Parkar @ Dadabhai (A-17):
He has disclosed facts in relation to the landing at Shekhadi. He was informed by Tiger Memon (AA) that a landing would take place on 3.2.1993. Additionally, Tiger Memon had told him to contact Assistant Collector R.K. Singh (A-102) over the phone, to tell him that he was an informant and that he wanted to provide to him certain information, for which he should come to Hotel Big Splash. R.K. Singh (A-102) told him that it was not possible for him to come there, but he would send his Superintendent and in pursuance thereof, the appellant (A-90) had gone there. Tiger Memon and co-accused (A-17) engaged in certain discussion, and Tiger Memon told him that there was some landing work on the said date. He further stated that they had received Rs.15 lakhs to be distributed among officers, as per the instructions of Dawood Takliya (A-14), out of which a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs was paid to R.K. Singh (A-102), Inspector Padwal and to the appellant (A-90).
401. Depositions of Sitaram Maruti Padwal(PW-146), Madhukar Krishna Dhandure (PW-153) and Yashwant Balu Lotale (PW-154) :
They are customs officials and have deposed and approved that Assistant Collector R.K. Singh (A-102) and the appellant (A- 90), alongwith other Custom officers of the Alibagh Division went to the Persian Darbar hotel. There was a meeting held at the said hotel, and there were talks held with Mohd. Bhai for about half an hour.
402. Deposition of Shivkumar Ramanand Bhardwaj (PW-470):
He has stated that in January 1993, he had received certain information from the DRI Bombay, to the effect that some ISI syndicates who were located in the Middle East and also in Bombay, may try to smuggle contraband and arms into the districts of Bombay, Raigad and Bassin. After receipt of said information, he had sent DO letter (Ext. 1536) to the Assistant Collector R.K. Singh (A-102) and others, and had also given instructions over the telephone. This DO letter was proved by Pradeep Kumar (PW- 471). The said letter was received by R.K. Singh (A-102) and this information was further circulated to all the Superintendents working under his jurisdiction.
403. In the statement made under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.), the appellant (A-90) has completely denied the recording of his confessional statement by Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186), while answering the questions put to him. The appellant (A-90) refused to acknowledge most of the incriminating material that was pointed out to him by the Designated Court. The Designated Court considered the same in great detail, appreciating it alongwith the cross-examination of Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186). The appellant (A-90) has further stated under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that in his confessional statement, his signatures were forcibly obtained on 1.5.1993, and subsequently on 3.5.1993 at a few places, when a sentence was inserted in the margin of page 3. The same were obtained in the office of SP T.S. Bhal, P.W.191, through force and by torturing the appellant (A-90).
404. However, after considering everything on record, the learned Designated Court came to the conclusion that there was no manipulation in his confessional statement, and that the same had voluntary been made by appellant (A-90). His explanation was that, after recording his confessional statement, Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186) had sent it to the CJM, who had not accepted the same, and had returned it. Therefore, there was manipulation. Such an averment was rejected by the Designated Court, pointing out that the same had been sent directly by Chaturvedula Shastri (PW-186) to the Designated Court, Pune, which had received it directly. Therefore, the question of any kind of manipulation did not arise. Thus, the confessional statement cannot be termed as a manufactured document, as has been claimed by appellant (A-90).
405. The evidence on record leads to the conclusion that the appellant (A-90) had participated in the meetings held at Hotel Persian Darbar on 6.1.1993 in connection with landings. The appellant accepted a huge amount of money as his share of illegal gratification from co-accused R.K. Singh (A-102) permitting the other accused persons for landing on 9.1.1993, and part of the same had been recovered from the appellant. The appellant (A-90) also participated in the meeting at Hotel Big Splash, wherein Sharif Abdul Gafoor Parkar @ Dadabhai Parkar (A-17) and Tiger Memon (AA) were present and therein the negotiations took place for Shekhadi landing. As the said landing took place the involvement of the appellant becomes apparent.
405.1 The evidence further disclosed that the landings contained contraband goods i.e. sophisticated arms, ammunition and explosives and the same could not be used for any purpose other than commission of terrorist acts.
406. We find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the Designated Court. The appeal is dismissed accordingly.
*****************
