Topic
The Supreme Court referred to a larger bench whether Section 47-A requires fraudulent intent for valuation references, doubting the V.N. Devadoss precedent. The reference was made solely on guideline value exceeding the instrument's consideration, with no fraud alleged against the parties.
Madras High Court ruled that once importers establish prima facie compliance with Notification 32/97, the burden of proving diversion of duty-free goods shifts to the Revenue. The Court upheld confiscation and penalties of Rs. 71.72 lakh, reinforcing that fraudulent intent must be affirmatively proven by customs authorities, not presumed.
Chhattisgarh High Court rules that a consensual relationship, even if followed by refusal to marry, does not attract penal provisions under Section 69 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita unless fraudulent intent is proven at the time of intercourse. The court granted anticipatory bail, emphasizing that post-relationship conduct alone cannot establish criminal liability.
Chhattisgarh High Court holds that mere stock shortage under custom milling agreements does not constitute criminal offence without proof of fraudulent intent at time of misappropriation.