TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 495X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case registered against the son of the petitioner in November, 2017. Arpit Jain son of the petitioner is not an accused in the present case. Hence, it would be a debatable issue as to whether the amount recovered from the son of the petitioner in another criminal case can be clubbed with the present recovery from the petitioner. The said aspect can be gone into by the Trial Court during trial. Petitioner be admitted to bail subject to satisfaction of the Trial Court - petition allowed. - S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 10688 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 5-9-2018 - Sabina, J. Shri Ashvin Garg, for the Petitioner. Shri R.D. Rastogi, SPP with C.S. Sinha and Akshay Bhardwaj, for the Respondent. ORDER Petitioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n in their statements under Section 108 of the Act have stated that the said amount was handed over by the petitioner to his son. Petitioner is in custody since 17-7-2018. Presently petitioner is in judicial custody. 3. Learned Counsel for Union of India has opposed the petition and has submitted that the bail petition filed by the petitioner was liable to be dismissed as the petitioner could be said to be carrying foreign currency with Indian currency value of Rupees thirty five lacs fifty thousand and twenty six plus Rupees ninety lacs twenty four thousand and twelve in view of the statements made by the petitioner and his son under Section 108 of the Act. The amount carried by the petitioner and his son were liable to be clubbed. In s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For reasons set out in the judgment in Cr. A. 27/67 (Romesh Chand Mehta v. State of West Bengal) and the judgment of this Court in Badku Joti Savant s case, we are of the view that a Customs Officer is under the Act of 1962 not a police officer within the meaning of Section 25 of the Evidence Act and the statements made before him by a person who is arrested or against whom an inquiry is made are not covered by Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act. 4. Learned Counsel has next placed reliance on the decision given by the Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Naresh J. Sukhawani v. Union of India, 1995 Supp (4) Supreme Court Cases 663 = 1996 (83) E.L.T. 258 (S.C.), wherein, it was held as under :- It must be remembered that the state ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... munity is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to books. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the Community. A disregard for the interest of the Community can be manifested only at the cost of forfeiting the trust and faith of the Community in the system to administer justice in an even handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters which view white collar crimes with a permissive eye unmindful of the damage done to the National Economy and National Interest. 6. Learned Counsel has also placed relian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
