9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irus in prisons for releasing them for 90 days looking to the present scenario of pandemic Corona (Covid-19) mainly contending that the petitioners are engaged in trading of gold and silver ornaments in shop owned by petitioner No. 1 situated at Rajnandgaon. Upon an intelligence input received by respondent authorities on 01.05.2021, the respondents seized certain amount of foreign origin gold bars from Ranjeet Maruti Phate and Jijoba Shankar Kadam at Raipur. It is alleged by the respondent authorities that as per the information provided by Ranjeet Maruti Phate and Jijoba Shankar Kadam, the delivery of seized gold was to be given to petitioner No. 3- Shekhu @ Sushil Kumar Jain of Rajnandgaon and his accomplice/petitioner No. 2-Cheeku @ Gautam Baid, who had informed that they had come to take delivery of the seized gold upon instruction of petitioner No. 1- Vijay Baid. The respondent authorities had conducted search and seizure proceedings at residential/ business premises of the petitioners at Rajnandgaon, which continued from 01.05.2021 to 02.05.2021. The petitioners were arrested by respondent authorities at their office at Raipur on 03.05.2021 for alleged commission of offence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vacuation of taxes, but also amounts to hampering India's economic growth. it has also been found in the investigation that they are habitual criminals. The DRI has also issued notice to them for smuggling for which they have also been penalized. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate may consider that the petitioners have committed economic offence which hampers the country's economic growth and would submit that the application filed by them be rejected. 4. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate considering the submission of the parties vide impugned order dated 22.05.2021 has rejected the application of the petitioners for grant of interim bail. The findings recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Raipur are extracted below:- 5. This impugned order is being challenged by the petitioners before this court by filing Writ Petition (Criminal) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India mainly contending that in view of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition (C) No. 01/2020 on 07.05.2021 and the recommendation made by the High Power Committee, they are entitled for grant of interim bail for 90 days. It is prayed that this writ pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are in custody for 15 days or more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 07 years or less; 4. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are senior citizens of 60 or more than 60 years of age and are in custody for three months or more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 10 years or less" " It has further been resolved that following category of UTPs, even if falling in the above criterion should not be consider:- 5. Those under trial prisoners who are facing trial under Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act)/ PMLA; and 6. Case investigated by CBI/ED/NIA/Special Cell, Crime Branch, SFIO, Terror related Cases, Riot cases, cases under Anti-National Activities and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act etc." Section 135 of the Customs Act, which is as under:- "135. Evasion of duty or prohibitions.-[(1) Without prejudice to any action that may be taken under this Act, if any person- (a) is in relation to any goods in any way knowingly concerned in misdeclaration of value or in any fraudulent evasion or attempt at evasion of any duty chargeable thereon or of any prohibition for the time being imposed under this Act or any oth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (ii) the fact that in any proceeding under this Act, other than a prosecution, the accused has been ordered to pay a penalty or the goods which are the subject matter of such proceedings have been ordered to be confiscated or any other action has been taken against him for the same act which constitutes the offence; (iii) the fact that the accused was not the principal offender and was acting merely as a carrier of goods or otherwise was a secondary party to the commission of the offence; (iv) the age of the accused.]" 10. From perusal of Section 135 of the Act, 1962, it is evident that the punishment for committing offence under Section 135 of the Act, 1962, is upto seven years. Learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon the provisions of this Act, would submit that as per Section 135 (1)(b) of the Act, 1962, the case of the petitioners is squarely covered in clause 3 of recommendation issued by the High Power Committee, which provides that the under trial prisoners (UTPs)/ Remand Prisoners (with respect to whom, charge sheet are yet to be filed), who are in custody for 15 days or more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 7 years or less ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... completed and the charge-sheet is filed. Para 37 & 38 of the judgment are reproduced as under:- "37. There can be no doubt that the outbreak of the novel COVID-19 pandemic and its spread has been a matter of serious public concern. The virus being highly infectious, precautions to prevent spread of infection to the extent possible are imperative. In Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.1 of 2020 In Re : Contagion of Covid 19 Virus In Prisons, this Court expressed concern over the possibility of spread of COVID-19 amongst prisoners lodged in overcrowded correctional homes and accordingly issued directions from time to time, directing the authorities concerned to inter alia take steps as directed by this Court, to minimize the risk of spread of COVID amongst the inmates of correctional homes. This Court also directed that a High Powered Committee be constituted by the States and Union Territories to consider release of some prisoners on interim bail or parole during the Pandemic, to prevent overcrowding of prisons. 38. It appears that the High Court has completely mis- appreciated the object, scope and ambit of the directions issued by this Court from time to time in In Re : Conta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
