Wrongly Convicted Database Record

 

Go to Database Search Page

Go to  Database Index Page

Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani

 

Charge:

Smuggling Goods

Sentence:

Rs 18 lakh

Years Imprisoned:

0.02

Year Crime:

2002

Year Convicted:

2002

Year Cleared:

2017

U.S. State or Country of Crime:

India

County or Region of Crime:

Delhi

City of Crime:

Delhi

Result:

Judicially Exonerated

Summary of Case:

"Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani was wrongly convicted in 2002 of smuggling in Delhi, India. The prosecution of Pushpa Tolani was based on her arrest in Delhi on November 19, 2002 while enroute from London to Singapore, without declaring 44 pieces of jewelry in her possession. She was in custody for 7 days until her release on November 26, 2002. After her conviction Tolani was fined Rs 18 lakh. Tolani appealed. In September 2006 the Delhi HIgh Court affirmed her conviction, but quashed her fine. She appealed. In April 2007 a sessions judge set aside her conviction. The State appealed. On August 19, 2017 India's Supreme Court affirmed the quashing of Tolani's conviction. The Court ruled that the jewelry seized from the woman could have been been meant for her personal use, stating: "A passenger going through the green channel is itself a declaration that he has no dutiable or prohibited articles," and, "it did not make any difference whether the jewellery (was) new". The bench of Justices R.K. Agrawal and P.C. Pant also stated, "Bringing jewellery into India for taking it out with the passenger is permissible and is not liable to any import duty." (Rs 18 lakh = US$27,692 at the exchange rate of 1 Lakh = US$1,538.46 on August 19, 2017)"

Conviction Caused By:

Innocence Proved By:

"On August 19, 2017 India's Supreme Court affirmed the quashing of Tolani's conviction. The Court ruled that the jewelry seized from the woman could have been been meant for her personal use, stating: "A passenger going through the green channel is itself a declaration that he has no dutiable or prohibited articles," and, "it did not make any difference whether the jewellery (was) new". The bench of Justices R.K. Agrawal and P.C. Pant also stated, "Bringing jewellery into India for taking it out with the passenger is permissible and is not liable to any import duty.""

Defendant Aided By:

Compensation Awarded:

Was Perpetrator Identified?

Age When Imprisoned:

Age When Released:

Sex:

Female

Skin/Ethnicity:

Information Source 1:

"Jewellery relief for tourists, By R. Balaji, New Delhi, August 19, 2017"

Information Location 1:

https://www.telegraphindia.com/1170820/jsp/nation/story_168179.jsp

Information Source 2:

Information Location 2:

Information Source 3:

Information Location 3:

Information Source 4:

Information Location 4:

Information Source 5:

Information Location 5:

Book About Case:

Book Information:

Book About Case (2):

Book Information (2):

Movie About Case:

Comments About Case:

Innocents Database Created and Maintained by Hans Sherrer innocents@forejustice.org

Hosted on forejustice.org and mirrored on justicedenied.org .