Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2010 (1) TMI 262

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... not put their attendance for re cording their statement. I am of the opinion that in the absence of reasonable apprehension of arrest, an anticipatory bail cannot be granted. - 6576 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 20-1-2010 - A.S. Pachhapure, J. Shri Ranga Assocs., Advocate, for the Petitioner. Shri Urval N. Ramanand, CGSC, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The petition is filed apprehendmg arrest for the offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 [ referred to as "the Act" for short]. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are as under: The petitioners are the Directors of M/s. Live Ads [India] Private Limited, a Company governed by the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956. It does business .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... that the respondent has no reason to summon the petitioners and to make an enquiry for the offence under Section 135 of the Act as the samples were drawn in the month of April 2009 and the test report dated 13-4-2009 received by the respondent does not reveal any defect in the ex port material and that the summoning of the petitioners is an abuse of the process of law. 4. They state that they are ready to co-operate with the respondent whenever they are summoned and are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed for release on bail. They further submit that they are respectable citizens and are permanent residents of Bangalore and that they will not run away from the jurisdiction. On these grounds they have sought fo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... petitioners? That they have apprehension of arrest under Section 135 of the Act and summons were issued by the Customs Authority under Section 108 of the Act. So also they state that they have not committed any unlawful act and that they are innocent parsons and apprehending arrest in respect of non-bailable offence. They also rely upon the decision of the Apex Court reported in 2008 (231) E.L.T. 397 (S.C.) = 2008 AIR SCW 7220 [Union of India v. Padam Narain Aggarwal Etc] . 9. Per contra, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel submits that the said decision is not applicable to the facts on hand as there was blanket order of anticipatory bail nullifying the provisions of Section 104 of the Act. Further more, he submits that th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 4) Every such inquiry as aforesaid shall be deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of section 193 and section 228 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860." So, now the petitioners have been issued summons under the above said provision and it is for the Gazetted Officer to record the statements of the petitioners and the proceedings before the Gazetted officer are deemed to be a judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 193 and Section 228 of the Indian Penal Code. The officer has also authority to require production of order permitting clearance of the goods imported by the land, the seizure of goods, documents and things and also the confiscation under Chapter 14 of the above said Act. 11. The petitioners are apprehendi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... into consideration the blanket order passed by the High Court, the Apex Court quashed the said Order, but so far as the remaining portion of the Order holding that there are no reasonable grounds to apprehend the arrest for the offence, the Apex Court has not interfered. The principle laid-down does not apply to the facts on hand in view of the facts and circumstances that it is only a summons which was issued by the respondent for recording the statement of the 1st petitioner and that itself is not sufficient to hold reasonable apprehension of arrest. 13. Furthermore it is revealed from the material placed on record that the summons were issued to the petitioners on 26-10-2009 and on other 3 more occasions and since then the petitioners .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates