Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2022 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (6) TMI 16 - HC - CustomsSeeking grant of bail - export of fake jewellery by mis-declaring the same as gold jewellery with respect to the past consignment - substantive evidences or not - retraction of statements - offences under Section 135(1)(b) and 135 (1)(ia) of Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- This Court is of the view that merely the Custom Department has cleared the goods it will not take away the cloud in those transactions, without interrogating the importer in Dubai from the petitioners during the relevant point of time. To verify whether the earlier consignments sent to the Dubai customer was really 22 carat gold jewels is subject matter of probe. Also it is necessary to probe into the mode of layering by which the money sent to Dubai Company through Non-Banking Source. The observation of the Bombay High Court in MR. BIHARILAL SINGHAL VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2010 (4) TMI 136 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], which says “for the demand of the past imports revenue cannot withhold the current consignment and in the absence of any position action by issuing show cause notice” hence no relevancy, since it is not a case of action without show cause notice nor withholding of present consignment for recovery of old demand of duty in respect of goods already assessed and exported - Similarly, in SANJAY CHANDRA VERSUS CBI [2011 (11) TMI 537 - SUPREME COURT] and GOVIND GOPAL GOYAL VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 [2017 (11) TMI 309 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], bail in these sorts of cases were dealt in terms of facts and circumstances of those cases and it is for the Courts to balance the Nations economic interest as against the individual personal liberty. Not in all cases, the period of incarceration alone matters, the stage of investigation, the ramification of the crime its network and the possibility of screening vital links, if the petitioners are let out on bail are the factors to be taken into consideration. In the instant case, the release of petitioners on bail is not conducive for investigation and therefore, petition for bail is dismissed. Considering the ramification of the offence and the design conceived by the petitioners herein to evade custom duty, without any interference requires investigation. The release of these petitioners will lead to tampering the witnesses - Petition dismissed.
|