- (1.) This appeal, by special leave raises the question whether a Customs Officer either under the Land Customs Act 1924 (Act XIX of 1924) or under the Sea Customs Act. 1878 (Act VIII of 1878), is a police officer within the meaning of that expression in S. 25 of the Indian Evidence Act.
(2.) Barkat Ram, respondent in this appeal, was the engine driver of 78 Down Train which reached Amritsar at about 4-15 p.m., on June 8, 1957. The train came from Pakistan. In consequence of information received with respect to the smuggling of gold by the engine crew, the Land Customs staff boarded the engine at Attari and other staff of the Department surrounded the engine in its arrival at Amritsar. The engine was searched and a quantity of gold was recovered, having been found front concealed underneath the coal in the font part of the coal tender in the engine. The respondent was further interrogated at the Customs Station and, as a result of further search, another quantity of was recovered from the rear part of the coal tender. A document, Ex. P. E., dated June 5, 1957, was also recovered. This document was shown to the respondent on June 9, 1957, and the respondent inscribed on this document the note, Ex. P. D 1 to the effect : "..the letter is the same which Tawaqual Shah had given to me yesterday. The same is to be delivered Pakistan and has stayed at Grand Hotel." On June 9, 1957, Barkat Ram, the respondent, made certain other statements, Ex. P. K., to Manohar Singh Bedi, Inspector of Customs, stating therein: "As usual on the 8th June, 1957, I took two bundles of Indian Currency from Ghulam Mohd. at Amritsar to Pakistan and when I brought 65 bars of gold from Tawakal Shah, from Pakistan, the Customs Officers recovered these 65 bars of gold from the engine at the Railway Station, Amritsar. I had kept concealed these 65 bars of gold in the engine in the presence of Shri Ram Murti and Shri Jagan Nath, my two Fire men, at the Loco Shed, Lahore. I was to deliver this gold to Ghulam Mohd. at Amritsar." A second statement was made to the same Customs Inspector on June 17, 1957, Ex. P. G. On this occasion too, he made a similar statement, adding that he was to get Rs. 200 against the delivery of gold.
(3.) On the complaint of the Assistant Collector of Land Customs, Amritsar, Barkat Ram was tried for offences punishable under S. 23(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, and under S. 167(81) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878, as amended in 1955. He was convicted by the Magistrate. The conviction was confirmed by the appellate Court, but was set aside on revision by the High Court which held that Customs Officers were police officers within the meaning of that expression in S. 25 of the Evidence Act that confessional statements made to them were consequently inadmissible in evidence and that if they be excluded from consideration, there was no other evidence to sustain the conviction. It further held that S. 27 of the Evidence Act did not apply to the facts of the case, as the recovery of gold was the result of search made by the Customs officers and not the result of interrogating the respondent. The State of Punjab has filed this appeal against the acquittal order.;