2021 (1) TMI 455 - HC - Customs

Grant of Bail - bail applications were dismissed for the reason that he had violated the bail condition and there is a possibility that he may again abscond and secondly for the reason that he was undergoing COFEPOSA detention - HELD THAT - Considering the present pandemic situation, it is not likely that the trial would get over immediately. The applicant's justification for the violation of the condition is that he had gone to Bangalore to meet his son and subsequently, he overstayed and could not return on time to report before the investigating officer as directed by this Court. His leaving jurisdiction and not reporting before the investigating officer initially was with permission. But subsequently, he overstayed and also defaulted the conditions and could ultimately be apprehended only on 12.12.2019 for undergoing detention of COFEPOSA. Hence there is a reasonable doubt expressed by the prosecution that the applicant may again default bail condition. The stringent conditions can be made for granting bail since he has antecedents of violating the bail condition and granting bail - the bail application is allowed and the applicant is directed to be released on bail on the execution of a bond for ₹ 1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount each to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional court and on the conditions imposed.

Summary

Issues:
Granting bail to the applicant based on violation of bail conditions and history of absconding.

Analysis:
The applicant, the 5th accused in a case under Section 135 of the Customs Act, was initially arrested and granted bail with specific conditions. However, he violated the bail conditions by not appearing before the investigating officer and seeking permission to leave the district. The prosecution moved for cancellation of bail, which was granted by the Sessions Judge. The applicant was apprehended later and placed under COFEPOSA detention. Despite multiple bail applications being dismissed due to violations and ongoing detention, the applicant sought bail after being released from COFEPOSA.

During the hearing, the prosecution expressed concerns about the applicant's history of absconding and non-compliance with court orders. They argued against granting bail, citing the advanced stage of the investigation. The defense justified the violations by stating the applicant's delay in returning from Bangalore, where he had gone to meet his son with prior permission.

Considering the circumstances, including the pandemic situation and the applicant's past behavior, the court acknowledged the need for stringent bail conditions. The court granted bail on the execution of a bond and imposed several strict conditions, including surrendering the passport, regular appearances before the investigating officer, depositing security money, refraining from influencing witnesses or committing similar offenses, and not leaving the district without court permission. The prosecution was also given the right to apply for bail cancellation if the conditions were violated.