TMI Blog2009 (7) TMI 163X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case. No grounds which are required to have been established for the purpose of seeking cancellation of bail have been brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner inasmuch as the circumstances when bail can be recalled. Petition dismissed. - 300 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 15-7-2009 - Mool Chand Garg, J. [Order]. - This order shall dispose of the present petition filed on behalf of the petitioner (Directorate of Revenue Intelligence) seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respondent by the Court of Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi vide order dated 18-12-2008 under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that on 28-2-2006 the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- Arguments on bail application heard. In nut shell the prosecution case against the accused is as follows. One Liyakan and his associates were apprehended near IGI Airport. In the interrogation of the accused Shan Mohd. arrested along with said Liyakan. Name of one Bhura occurred who was involved in the import of fake currency notes into India on 28-2-2006. Despite efforts of custom department Bhura could not be identified and arrested. Later on accused Jamil was arrested by the Special Cell Delhi Police in connection with the possession of the fake currency notes. When the accused was in custody the interrogation was carried out by customs department also. In his statement under Section 108 Customs Act he stated that he had rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of DRI v. Liaqan Ors. It has been submitted that in fact the Sessions Court had dismissed the bail application of Shan Mohd., the co-accused of the respondent vide order dated 2-12-2008 and in view of the aforesaid, the ACMM was not competent to have passed this order in favour of the respondent. 5. It has been submitted that while passing the impugned order the Trial Court has not taken into consideration that the respondent was involved in more than one case of fake Indian currency note and has also not considered the written reply filed to the bail application wherein the petitioner mentioned the role of respondent Mohd. Jamil as per the statement made by one Mohd. Sajid, who stated that it is Mohd. Jamil who gave a passpo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Trial Court or before this Court. Moreover, the respondent is already on bail in the other connected matter and has not abused the concession of bail. In fact, the application for cancellation of bail, if any, to be moved, should have been moved before the Court of ACMM, which is not being done in the present case. It is also submitted that even otherwise except for the statement of respondent recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, which per se is not. admissible in evidence unless and until corroborated by some other evidence, there is no other evidence against the respondent and as such even on merits the petitioners have no case for seeking cancellation of bail. It is also submitted that out of total of 23 witnesses, only 2 wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case. No grounds which are required to have been established for the purpose of seeking cancellation of bail have been brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner inasmuch as the circumstances when bail can be recalled, which could be summarised as follows :- (1) Where the accused has misused the liberty granted to him. (2) Where accused has attempted to tamper with the evidence. (3) Where he has attempted to influence the witnesses. (4) Where there is a possibility of the accused to abscond and, therefore, there is a possibility that the accused may not be available for trial. 11. Reference in this regard can be made to the following judgments :- (1) Sami Ullaha v. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
