9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 559X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Buch and has opposed this application. 3. Brief facts, emerge from the record, are as under :- 3.1 That the Crime Branch of Ahmedabad city had received a secret and authentic information that huge consignment of gold, is being illegally going to arrive at Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport and, therefore, Special Operation Group headed by Police Inspector B. D. Jadeja along with his team, were keeping watch in the airport area i.e. outside the terminal. On 24.2.2015, three accused i.e. Virendrasingh, the present applicant Clifford Antony DCosta and Sapna Vaghela were successful in coming out from the Airport terminal with illegal consignment of 60 bars of gold, weighting 60 Kgs., having worth at Rs. 16 Crores. Two accused, namely, Jayvirsing Kaden and Kapil Jaydevsingh Dagar and one another person namely Dinesh Desai had come to receive those three persons, all of six accused were cough raid handed by the said team while they were trying to load the consignment in a four wheeler. Accordingly Panchnama was prepared and an FIR being C. R. No. I - 15 of 2015 was registered on the same day i.e. on 24.2.2015 for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 11 & 120(B) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liberately prolonged investigation and, therefore, though he is behind the bar pursuant to an offence registered by DCB Police Station on 24.2.2015, the applicant was arrested for the present offence after more than six months. He would submit that it is an undisputed fact that the present applicant was arrested on 24.2.2015 by DCB Crime and was in judicial custody up to 28.8.2015 when the applicant was formally arrested by the respondent authority. He would submit that even if prima facie, it is believed that the case put forward by DCB Crime that 60 gold bars worth Rs. 16 Cores was illegally taken out from the airport terminal by those three accused, who had traveled from Dubai to Ahmedabad and were found with the same, it is the case of the prosecution the applicant was allegedly had came to receive them, the respondent - Customs authority did not care to arrest him immediately and waited for considerable long time i.e. for more than six months. He would further submit that even after his arrest, the respondent agency has deliberately filed the complaint on the last date of limitation as provided u/s.167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He would submit that the gold, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CB Crime Police Station is concerned, the learned Sessions Judge has released the applicant on regular bail by passing order on 23.12.2015 in Criminal Misc. Application No.4234 of 2015. He would submit that co-accused at whose instance goods alleged to have been imported, have been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 22.12.2015 in Criminal Misc. Application No.22821 of 2015. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Hriday Buch, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 has opposed this application by taking me through the statements of witnesses namely Pravinbhai, Yogeshbhai Patel, etc. as well as statements of other accused recorded u/s.108 of the Act. He would submit that it is an undisputed fact that the applicant had travelled from Dubai to Ahmedabad with other accused and in connivance with another accused, whose brother is settled at Dubai, who is regularly dealing with such illegal activities like sending gold bars in huge quantity without paying custom duties. He would submit that Red Corner Notice has been issued against brother of one of the accused. He, therefore, would submit that the applicant is involved in serious crime and, therefore, this applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pter XIV of the Act, has been initiated for confiscating the goods. Furthermore, the co-accused is considered by this Court vide order dated 10.2.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.1689 of 2016. As far as allegations made by the prosecution that in past also, the applicant had indulged in similar activities, which is under investigation, in my opinion, that would not be the ground to reject the application, since the authority had sufficient time to complete the investigation. I have also considered the ratio laid down by Honble Apex Court in the case of Sanjay Chandra (supra) as well as in the case of Kalyan Chandra Sarkar V/s. Rajesh Ranjan reported in 2004(7) SCC 528, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the factors, which are required to be considered for granting bail would be : (a) The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence (b) Reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant. (c) Prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge. By relying upon the decision rendered in the case of State of Kerala V/s. Raneef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
