ISSUE:
Whether the Customs Department adequately discharged its burden to prove the goods were smuggled?
Can the confiscation of goods be justified solely based on circumstantial evidence and the conduct of the alleged owner?
RULE:
The onus of proof does not demand perfect or absolute certainty; it often relies on a prudent person's reasonable assessment of the case's probabilities.
The prosecution is not required to prove facts that lie exclusively within the accused's knowledge, as this would impose an unreasonably high burden.
Instead, the burden shifts to the accused to provide a satisfactory explanation for such facts, particularly when the prosecution has presented circumstantial evidence supporting its claims.