Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (7) TMI 1086

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hich is obviously not available to the respondents. Therefore, no doubt, the seized goods are liable for confiscation, penalty and to be dealt under the Customs Act. By granting bail, the learned trial court has not discharged the respondents from the case. Simply because they are foreigners cannot be kept detained in judicial custody if they are entitled to be released on bail. Further the respondents are directed to surrender their pass-ports before the Trial Court. The learned trial court is at liberty to release the respondents on the same terms and conditions as imposed vide its order dated 29.06.2015 and by this Court. - Decided against the revenue - CRL.M.C. 2577/2015 And Crl. M.A. 9193/2015 & Crl. M.A. 9399/2015 - - - Dated:- 10-7- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that there was no change of circumstances from 18.06.2015 till 29.06.2015, when the respondents were granted bail. The ld. Trial Judge has wrongly noted that the investigation is complete and the petitioner does not require any custodial investigation. Whereas in reply to the application dated 24.06.2015, the petitioner has specifically stated that enquiries are on and in fancy. 5. Mr. Aggarwal further submits that whether the respondents have any link in India for smuggling purposes or they are involved in previous smuggling activities, this aspect can be ascertained only when they are in judicial custody. Moreover, they are foreign nationals and if they are released on bail .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... did not furnish the particulars of Indian national, in Hon Kong, for whom he had been smuggling gold into India. He also did not disclose the recipients/s of smuggled gold in India. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that before learned ACMM, the petitioner relied upon the case of Robert Lendi vs. The Collector of Customs and another 1987 Crl. L. J. 55 wherein this Court held as under:- 22. It was next urged by Mr. Mehta that the even if a distinction is recognised between the 'Enquiry' and 'Trial' the petitioner was entitled to grant of bail, as the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case was 17th of February 1986 and that since sixty days' period has expired the petitioner should be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... an vs. Commissioner of Customs Anr, 2000 III AD Delhi 369 wherein the accused remained in judicial custody for six months and thereafter released on bail. In the present case, the respondents have brought six bricks of gold. They were intercepted at T3, IGI Airport, New Delhi. The goods have been seized and liable to be confiscated absolutely. Investigation in this matter is going on. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the learned trial court deserves to be set aside. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that first bail application of the respondents was dismissed on 18.06.2015. Therefore, there was no change of circumstances for moving the second bail application and granting bail. 8. The fact remains that t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... they are in judicial custody. Admittedly, section 108 statement has also been recorded vide order dated 09.07.2015. The petitioner/Department was directed to produce the original case file to see whether the petitioner has taken any steps to find out the linkage of the respondents to any Indian national for smuggling purposes. After perusal of the case file, it appears that no steps have been taken and the complaint against the respondents has still not been filed. If the present case is of serious nature, as claimed by the petitioner, why steps have not been taken to find out any previous visit, their link in India? Simply claiming that the respondents are foreign nationals, should not be released on bail, is without basis. Moreover, the T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates