2008 (5) TMI 672 - HC - Central Excise

Summary

Issues involved: Application for anticipatory bail in a case of alleged excise duty evasion by a company, non-compliance with court orders, cooperation in investigation, medical condition of the petitioner.

Summary:
1. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in relation to an excise duty evasion inquiry against a company. The petitioner, the Managing Director of the company, had been summoned as a witness in another case. Interim protection was granted earlier, subject to cooperation in the investigation.

2. The respondent highlighted the petitioner's non-compliance with court orders to appear for investigation, citing medical reasons for absence. The petitioner expressed willingness to cooperate and explained the medical situation. Summons were produced, showing they were for a different case.

3. The court directed the petitioner to appear for investigation on a specified date, emphasizing continued cooperation. Stay of arrest was extended until the next hearing. The petitioner's counsel assured full cooperation and readiness to surrender passport if needed for travel.

4. The respondent opposed anticipatory bail, citing lack of cooperation from company employees and the petitioner. Court noted petitioner's regular appearances except during illness. Emphasized the importance of cooperation in the investigation process.

5. Court differentiated previous judgments cited by the respondent, highlighting the ongoing investigation into excise duty evasion. Bail was granted with conditions including a personal bond, surrender of passport, and cooperation in the investigation. Any violation would allow the respondent to seek bail cancellation.

Separate Judgement:
No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.