BABULAL AMTHALAL MEHTA versus THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA

BABULAL AMTHALAL MEHTA versus THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, CALCUTTA

Section 178-A of the Sea Customs Act, which places the burden of proof on the person from whose possession goods are seized under reasonable belief of smuggling, constitutes a reasonable classification relating directly to the object of preventing smuggling and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Petitioner: Babulal Amthalal Mehta; Respondent: Collector of Customs, Calcutta and others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 May 1957
Procedural Posture
Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment
Outcome
petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Burden of Proof, Smuggling, Equal Protection Under Article 14, Confiscation of Goods
Constitutional Law Customs Law Burden of Proof Smuggling Equal Protection Under Article 14 Confiscation of Goods

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Babulal Amthalal Mehta

Petitioner

Collector of Customs, Calcutta and others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition Under Article 32 / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 178-A of the Sea Customs Act, which places the burden of proof on the possessor of goods reasonably believed to be smuggled, violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi

Section 178-A of the Sea Customs Act, which places the burden of proof on the person from whose possession goods are seized under reasonable belief of smuggling, constitutes a reasonable classification relating directly to the object of preventing smuggling and does not violate Article 14 of the Constitution.

Court Disposition

petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition under Article 32 dismissed with costs.