2016 (5) TMI 503 - SC - Customs

Cancellation of bail - appellant herein, who is an under-trial, in criminal case registered against the appellant and others under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act - Held that - when the appellant had not violated any of the bail conditions, allowing the application for cancellation of bail after one year and three months, may not be appropriate. - even otherwise it would be a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant at this stage. - We, thus, enlarge the appellant on bail on the same conditions on which it was granted by the Trial Court.

Summary

Issues:
- Grant of bail by Trial Court
- Cancellation of bail by High Court
- Principles for cancelling bail
- Arguments by counsels
- Consideration of circumstances

The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered by Justices A. K. Sikri and R. K. Agrawal, considered the appeal regarding the grant and subsequent cancellation of bail in a criminal case under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act. The Trial Court had initially granted bail to the appellant, an under-trial, in May 2014. However, the High Court, in July 2015, allowed a petition under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973, filed by the respondent, leading to the cancellation of the bail.

Dr. A.M. Singhvi, representing the appellant, argued that the High Court did not adhere to the principles of cancelling bail, emphasizing that no change in circumstances warranted the cancellation. He contended that the appellant, who had not violated any bail conditions, had already undergone incarceration for over a year. On the other hand, Mr. Maninder Singh, learned ASG, highlighted that the High Court's decision was influenced by the previous rejection of bail in 2013 and the subsequent grant in 2014 without any significant change in circumstances.

The Court acknowledged the technical arguments presented by both parties but ultimately found merit in the appellant's plea for bail. Despite the one year and three months of under-trial detention, the Court deemed it a fit case for granting bail to the appellant. Consequently, the Court upheld the bail conditions set by the Trial Court and ordered the appellant's release on bail.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court disposed of the appeal by reinstating the bail for the appellant, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the principles governing bail and considering the circumstances of each case judiciously.