2021 (5) TMI 89 - HC - Customs

Grant of Anticipatory Bail - search procedure - allegation of gross under-valuation of the white paper roll imported - Allegation of Hawala Transactions as well - case of Revenue is that petitioner is a habitual offender - HELD THAT - All the documents are in the custody of the Customs. When specifically asked as to why Customs Authorities require the custody of the petitioner, no specific answer is forthcoming. As stated earlier, all the documents are in custody of the Customs Department. This particular case involves violation of Section 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. The allegation that the petitioner is involved in transfer of money through non-banking/hawala channels is a subject matter of investigation by another authority and as and when and if and when investigation in this regard is initiated by other authorities to prove the involvement of the petitioner in the transfer of money through non-banking/hawala channels they can arrest the petitioner if a case is registered against him. Since this issue is not germane to the facts of the present petition, this Court is not inclined to go into this issue. The petitioner has been granted protection by this Court on 05.02.2021. The petitioner stated that he is prepared to join the investigation. Section 41A of the Cr.P.C provides that where the arrest of a person is not required under the provisions of Section 41(1), the Police Officer shall issue a notice directing the person against whom a reasonable complaint has been made, or credible information has been received, or a reasonable suspicion exists that he has committed a cognizable offence, to appear before him or at such other place as may be specified in the notice. If the petitioner is required for investigation then an appropriate notice under Section 41A can be given to him directing to appear/join the investigation. Bail granted subject to conditions imposed - application allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C in a case involving offences under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
The petitioner, engaged in importing white paper through his firm, was accused of grossly undervaluing imported goods to evade customs duty. A search operation revealed discrepancies in the declared value of goods, prompting the Department of Revenue Intelligence to register a case. The petitioner approached the CESTAT for release of seized goods, which required executing a bond and bank guarantee. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail after specific allegations of duty evasion surfaced, leading to the dismissal of his initial application by the Additional Session Judge.

The petitioner's counsel argued that the seized goods were released by the Customs Authorities, and the petitioner cooperated with investigations post interim protection. In contrast, the DRI contended that the petitioner, a repeat offender, evaded VAT refund claims and under-declared imported goods. Despite multiple summons, the petitioner allegedly avoided appearances until seeking anticipatory bail, emphasizing the seriousness of economic offences affecting public funds.

The court considered the allegations of undervaluation and evasion amounting to approximately ?13 crores. The petitioner expressed willingness to cooperate with investigations, while the DRI insisted on his reluctance without protective bail. Referring to relevant judgments, the court noted the gravity of economic offences impacting the country's financial health. Granting bail, the court directed the petitioner to join investigations promptly upon notice, furnish a bond with sureties, and provide all mobile numbers to the Investigating Officer.

In conclusion, the court disposed of the application with specified conditions for granting anticipatory bail, emphasizing the petitioner's cooperation in investigations and adherence to bail terms to prevent cancellation.