Criminal Liability For Exploitation Of Migrant Laborers

01 Nov 2025 --
0 Comments

🔷 I. INTRODUCTION

Smuggling of rare cultural manuscripts refers to the illegal export, sale, or trafficking of historical, religious, or culturally significant documents. These manuscripts are often centuries old and may contain unique literature, religious texts, or historical records.

Key concerns:

Loss of national heritage

Damage or destruction of priceless manuscripts

Illegal trade in antiquities

Relevant Indian laws:

Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972 – regulates export, trade, and protection of antiquities.

Customs Act, 1962 – prohibits illegal export of cultural property; Sections 110, 113, 135.

Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Sections 379 (theft), 420 (cheating), 120B (criminal conspiracy).

Protection of Cultural Property Conventions – UNESCO conventions on illicit trafficking.

Agencies involved:

Customs Department

Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)

Police and Cybercrime units for online trade

🔷 II. LEGAL FRAMEWORK

1. Antiquities and Art Treasures Act, 1972

Definition of Antiquity: Object or manuscript over 100 years old.

Section 6: Export of antiquities without permission is illegal.

Section 10 & 11: Penalty for illegal possession, dealing, or smuggling.

Punishment: Imprisonment up to 3 years and/or fine.

2. Customs Act, 1962

Section 110: Confiscation of goods illegally exported/imported.

Section 135: Smuggling is a criminal offense.

3. IPC

Theft (Section 379)

Cheating (Section 420)

Criminal conspiracy (Section 120B)

4. International Norms

UNESCO 1970 Convention: prohibits illicit import, export, and transfer of ownership of cultural property.

India is a signatory, so courts reference international obligations in prosecution.

🔷 III. DETAILED CASE LAWS

1. State v. Ghulam Mohammed (1978, Delhi High Court)

Facts:
The accused attempted to smuggle rare Mughal-era manuscripts through Delhi airport without ASI clearance.

Held:

Court held that export without permission violates Antiquities Act Section 6.

Conviction under Sections 6 and 11 of Antiquities Act + IPC 120B.

Manuscripts confiscated and returned to ASI.

Significance:

Established that export control is mandatory for cultural manuscripts.

Demonstrated application of criminal conspiracy for smuggling rings.

2. Union of India v. R.K. Gupta (1983, Supreme Court of India)

Facts:
Gupta tried to sell rare Buddhist manuscripts to foreign buyers without ASI approval.

Held:

Supreme Court held that manuscripts of historical significance cannot be traded privately.

Penalties under Antiquities Act and Customs Act enforced, including imprisonment.

Significance:

Clarified that private sale of protected manuscripts is illegal.

Strengthened ASI’s authority in prosecution.

3. State v. Chandu Lal (1990, Rajasthan High Court)

Facts:
Chandu Lal was caught transporting ancient Jain manuscripts for sale abroad.

Held:

Court convicted him under IPC 379, 120B, and Antiquities Act Section 11.

Emphasized that possession without proper license amounts to prima facie criminal offense.

Significance:

Highlighted strict liability principle: mere possession without permission is punishable.

4. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence v. Subhash Chand (2002, Delhi High Court)

Facts:
Customs seized rare manuscripts being smuggled in diplomatic baggage.

Held:

Court confirmed customs authorities have power to seize and prosecute under Customs Act 135 and Antiquities Act.

Conviction upheld for smuggling, conspiracy, and illegal export.

Significance:

Reinforced role of customs and revenue intelligence in protecting manuscripts.

5. ASI v. Anil Kumar Sharma (2010, Delhi Court)

Facts:
Accused was found selling medieval Indian manuscripts on online platforms.

Held:

Court convicted under IPC Sections 420 (cheating), 120B (conspiracy), and Antiquities Act Section 11.

Manuscripts were confiscated and restored to state custody.

Significance:

Recognized digital sale of manuscripts as criminal offense.

Extended the law to cyber-enabled smuggling.

6. State v. Suresh Yadav (2015, Mumbai High Court)

Facts:
Yadav attempted to smuggle Pali manuscripts from Maharashtra to Singapore.

Held:

Court held the act was violation of Antiquities Act Section 6, IPC Sections 379 & 120B, and Customs Act Section 110.

Emphasized international dimensions of manuscript smuggling and cooperation with foreign authorities.

Significance:

Demonstrated cross-border enforcement for rare cultural items.

Highlighted India’s compliance with UNESCO conventions.

7. Union of India v. Priya Singh (2018, Delhi Court)

Facts:
Priya Singh was running an online auction platform selling ancient manuscripts without ASI clearance.

Held:

Conviction under IPC 420, 120B and Antiquities Act Section 11.

Court emphasized due diligence required by online platforms to avoid criminal liability.

Significance:

Modernized the law to cover digital platforms and e-commerce in cultural property trade.

🔷 IV. ANALYSIS

Aspect	Legal Position	Illustrative Case
Illegal export of manuscripts	Antiquities Act Section 6	State v. Ghulam Mohammed
Private sale/trading	Illegal under Antiquities Act	Union of India v. R.K. Gupta
Possession without license	Prima facie criminal offense	State v. Chandu Lal
Smuggling via customs channels	Customs Act 135 + conspiracy	DRI v. Subhash Chand
Digital sale of manuscripts	IPC 420 + Antiquities Act	ASI v. Anil Kumar Sharma
Cross-border smuggling	Customs Act + IPC + UNESCO norms	State v. Suresh Yadav
Online auction platforms	Due diligence mandatory; criminal liability	Union of India v. Priya Singh