TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 1028X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tory bail under Section 438 of Cr. P.C. is not sustainable. In UNION OF INDIA VERSUS PADAM NARAIN AGGARWAL ETC. [ 2008 (10) TMI 1 - SUPREME COURT ] it was held that the power to arrest a person by a Customs Officer is statutory and cannot be interfered with. It was observed that Section 108 does not contemplate magisterial intervention. As the power under the statute is exercised by a Gazetted Officer of the Customs Department, the person summoned is under obligation to state truth upon any subject in respect of which he is examined. This Court is prevented from entertaining the application. In the event of his arrest, the jurisdictional Court is at liberty to consider the applicant s plea of illness in case the proviso to Section 43 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... recording his statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act, notice shall be given to him so that he gets an opportunity to approach this Court afresh under Section 438 of Cr. P.C. Accordingly, the applicant was directed to appear on 12-8 2020, and he was subjected to interrogation and his statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act. He was made to sign the statement and compelled to write as dictated by the officers. The applicant apprehends that he may be arrested. He is very ill as is borne out from the medical records produced as Annexure-B series. According to the applicant, he can only be implicated for an offence under Section 135(1)(b) of the Customs Act. Consequent to the amendment of Section 104(6) and (7), offences c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C.)] and Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Rajamundry v. Duncan Agro Industries Ltd. [2000 KHC 1311 : 2000 (7) SCC 53 = 2000 (120) E.L.T. 280 (S.C.)]. 5. The decisions of the Supreme Court in Padam Narain Aggarwal (supra) and Romesh Chandra Mehta (supra) have been followed by the Division Bench of this Court in Kishin S. Loungani v. Union of India and Others [2017 (1) KHC 355 = 2017 (352) E.L.T. 433 (Ker.)] and by a Single Bench of this Court in Sahal V.J. v. Senior Intelligence of Officer [2019 KHC 488 = 2020 (371) E.L.T. 178 (Ker.)]. 6. The applicant apprehends that he may be arraigned as an accused in OR No. 7/2020 of Ernakulam Customs in which his son-in-law has been implicated as an accused. Going by the allegations, he appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
