K.N. Saikia, J. - (1.)THE State has appealed against the judgment dated 23.1.78, of the Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nalbari acquitting the Respondent of the charges under Section 135(6)(ii) of the Customs Act; 1962 and Section 85(1)(ii) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968.
(2.)ON 22.6.76 the customs preventive officers of Shillong and Gauhati searched the premises of the Respondent, Shri Satya Narayan Singhania, of Nalbari and recovered 15 pieces of primary gold, one gold mohar, all weighing 327.664 gms. worth about Rs. 14,000/ -, and three foreign silver coins from an almirah of the Respondent's bed room. The articles being seized along with some account books of the Respondent, the gold pieces and the mohar were tested by a registered goldsmith, After completion of the investigation the case was departmentally adjudicated by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Shillong which ended in absolute confiscation of the said primary gold and a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/ -. Adjudication proceeding under the Gold (Control) Act was also started by the Assistant Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Gauhati who imposed a penalty of Rs. 2000/ - under the Gold (Control) Act. The Respondent was also prosecuted, after obtaining sanction, under the aforesaid provisions of the Customs Act and the Gold (Control) Act on the offence report dated 18.4.77 whereupon the instant case was registered and after Investigation the Respondent was charge -sheeted under the aforesaid sections, namely, Section 135(6)(ii) of the Customs Act and Section 85(1)(ii) of the Gold Control Act.
At the trial the prosecution examined five witnesses while the defence examined no witness. P.W. 1, Shri P.K. Bordoloi, who is the Inspector of Customs, Preventive Unit, Shillong deposed that the 15 pieces of primary gold and the gold mohar and the three foreign silver coins were recovered from the steel almirah, seized as per Ext. 1 but admitted that they had no evidence to show that the pieces of gold were smuggled ones. He also admitted that a family was entitled to keep gold mohar upto 50 grams and that the gold mohar seized in the case weighed only 11 66 grams. He also admitted that there was no restriction as to keeping of silver. P.W. 4, Sri Tukan Ram Sonar, the registered goldsmith, who tested the seized gold, himself said the Respondent had given some of his wife's gold ornaments for melting and making new ornaments and that he entered those gold ornaments in his register and melted them but one day prior to the search he gave back the melted pieces to the Respondent's wife to keep those in safe custody as the Respondent was lying ill. P.W. 1 himself admitted what was stated by P.W. 4 about melting of old gold ornaments and giving the pieces to the Respondent's wife on the previous day. On that basis P.W. 1 also admitted that they had no evidence to show that the 15 pieces of gold were smuggled ones. P.W. 2, Sudhangsu Sekhar Chakravorty, Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise, Shillong stated that he checked the register, Ext. 'A' maintained by P.W. 4 and found that the giving of gold ornaments weighing 304 gms, melting of the ornaments and the return of the melted pieces to the Respondent were recorded in that register. He also stated that the seized primary gold was in pieces and those appeared to have been melted ornaments.

(3.)ON the basis of the above evidence on record the learned trial Court having held that the prosecution had failed to establish either of the charges against the accused Respondent and having acquitted him of the charges, the question before this Court is whether the view taken by the trial Court in favour of the accused -Respondent merits interference in this appeal against acquittal.
;