2019 (11) TMI 624 - HC - Customs

Bail application - recovery of gold in the possession of accused-applicant or not - case of accused is that no gold as shown by the prosecution has been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant and the prosecution story is false and concocted - HELD THAT - Perusal of record reveals that allegation of recovery of 24 pieces of gold weighting 3983.24 grams of the value of ₹ 1,027,07,110/- as assessed by the evaluator has been alleged to have been recovered from the possession of the accused-applicant. There is sufficient material on record substantiating the allegation against the accused-applicant. The statement of the accused-applicant recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act is admissible in evidence and from the perusal of whole record no fact has been highlighted, which may reflect that power has been exercised by the Custom Officers/Officials on whims. The accused-applicant was produced before the Magistrate without any delay after arrest and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the magnitude of the recovery of the gold from the possession of the accused-applicant as well the non-preferring any reasonable explanation of such possession, does not incline this Court to grant bail to the accused-applicant. There are no good ground to release the accused-applicant on bail - Under Section 104 of the Customs Act, 1962 an offence punishable under Section 135(c), wherein value of any goods not declared exceeds one crore rupees has been declared as non-bailable. Section 135 (1)(a)(i) (A) is punishable with an imprisonment which may extend to 7 years or with fine. The applicant for bail of accused-applicant is, accordingly, rejected.

Summary

Issues:
Bail application under Sections 135(1)(a)(i) r/w 104, 110, 11, 119, 123 of Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The accused-applicant filed a bail application in a case involving alleged illegal possession of gold under various sections of the Customs Act. The defense argued that the accused was falsely implicated, with no gold recovered from him. The defense also contended that the accused was taken forcefully while traveling and that the prosecution's story was fabricated. It was highlighted that the accused cooperated with the investigation and denied any criminal history. The defense emphasized that the accused was a law-abiding citizen and ready to comply with legal proceedings. However, the Customs Special Counsel opposed bail, stating that the accused was found in possession of 24 pieces of gold, weighing 3983.24 grams, with a total value of &8377; 1,27,07,110. The accused allegedly admitted to carrying the gold from Burma to Delhi for a monetary reward. The defense argued that the accused's possession of the gold was illegal under the Customs Act, justifying the denial of bail.

The court considered the arguments from both sides and examined the evidence, including the recovery of gold from the accused. The court noted that the accused's statement under Section 108 of the Customs Act indicated his involvement in smuggling gold, potentially part of a larger operation. The court found sufficient evidence supporting the allegations against the accused. Given the seriousness of the offense and the substantial value of the recovered gold, the court concluded that bail should be denied. The offense fell under Section 135(1)(a)(i)(A) of the Customs Act, punishable by up to 7 years of imprisonment. Concerns were raised about the accused's availability for trial, considering his frequent visits to Burma. The court emphasized the public and economic interests, rejecting the bail application.

Furthermore, the court directed the trial court to expedite proceedings, aiming for completion within six months. The trial was deemed triable by a Magistrate, with government witnesses expected to be readily available. The accused was given the option to renew the bail request if the trial exceeded the stipulated time frame. The court's decision was based on the seriousness of the offense, the value of the recovered gold, and the potential risks associated with granting bail to the accused in the context of the Customs Act violations.