Smuggling gold with the intent to hazard India’s financial safety can be thought of a terrorist: Rajashtan HC

Recently, in the Mohammed Aslam v Union of India case, the High Court of Rajasthan ruled that under Section 15 (l) (a) (iiia) of the 1967 Act, gold smuggling is with the intent or likely to threaten the country’s economic security at risk is very much covered by the smuggling of “other material” and therefore falls under the Terror Act.

Since the smuggling of valuable material can damage the nation’s monetary stability, which may or may likely endanger economic security, the legislature seems, in its own wisdom, not to have specified any specific material in this provision.

Therefore, the petitioner’s claim in this regard cannot be accepted. The Court stated this while refusing to overturn the FIR under UAPA in a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Court also found that the FIR filed under the UAPA Act cannot pose a double threat if prosecution is pending under the Customs Act in relation to the alleged gold smuggling activity. The offenses under the Customs Act and the 1967 Act are separate offenses that can be prosecuted separately and that would not violate Article 20 of the Constitution of India and Section 300 of the Cr.PC

Comments are closed.