STATE OF MAHARASHTRA vs MAYER HANS GEORGE

The Supreme Court held that under Section 8(1) and Section 23(1-A) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (7 of 1947), mens rea is not a necessary ingredient for the offence of smuggling gold into India. The Court ruled that the burden of proof lies on the accused to show they had permission to bring gold into the country, and ignorance of the Reserve Bank's notification does not absolve liability. The High Court's acquittal was overturned, affirming the conviction of the respondent for smuggling.