9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Bail application under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 - Consideration of seriousness of alleged offence - Legal criteria for granting bail - Application of Code of Criminal Procedure in FERA cases Analysis: The case involved a bail application under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA). The applicant, a bank employee, was charged with an offence punishable under FERA. The appellant's counsel argued that the alleged offence would, at most, result in a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for seven years. It was emphasized that the applicant had no criminal history and was unlikely to abscond. Reference was made to Supreme Court judgments in similar matters to support the bail application. The respondent's counsel contended that there was prima facie evidence to suggest the applicant's involvement in the offence under FERA. It was proposed that if bail were granted, conditions should be imposed to ensure the applicant's availability for interrogation and trial, including attending the office of Central Excise & Customs in Indore on specified days. The judge examined the seriousness of the alleged offence based on the case diary. It was highlighted that the prosecution's allegations played a crucial role in determining whether bail should be granted. The judge referenced Supreme Court decisions emphasizing the importance of liberty and the criteria for granting bail, focusing on ensuring the accused's availability for trial and preventing tampering with evidence. The court noted that the provisions of Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure applied to FERA cases, granting wider discretion to the court in bail matters. Despite the ongoing investigation and pending trial, the judge concluded that the applicant deserved bail, considering his employment status and lack of criminal history. When granting bail, the court imposed conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure the applicant's availability for trial. The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing security and executing a personal recognizance bond with specified conditions, including not contacting prosecution witnesses and attending the designated office when required. The bail order was subject to compliance with the stated conditions and restrictions on leaving the country without permission. In conclusion, the court granted bail to the applicant under FERA, emphasizing the need to balance the interests of justice and individual liberty while ensuring the accused's availability for trial and preventing interference with the investigation.
|
