9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... brought to Bangalore on 19-10-2021 and after recording his statement and is produced before this court on 20-10-2021 by the complainant. The allegation against the accused is that he was illegally exporting the antique which is said to be the idol of Lord Vishnu. On being satisfied with the grounds urged in the remand application, the accused was sent to the judicial custody. 2. The accused filed bail application under section 437 of Cr.P.C. seeking the regular bail on the ground that he is innocent and has not committed the alleged offence. There is no material to the effect that the accused participated in the commission of alleged offence. The idol in question is not antique as alleged by the complainant, but only antique look is given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on record goes to show that the accused is the consigner of the idol in question and the same was consigned in the Month of August-2020 and it also goes to show that the consignment was detained in the courier cell on 21-10-2020 as the same appeared antique in nature and thereafter, further investigation was carried out. It is alleged that the idol in question was referred to Archaeological Survey of India and after inspection the idol is identified as "Male Deity (Surya)" and certified as "Antiquity" vide letter dated 08-12-2020. From the records, it also reveals that summons was issued to the accused on 06-02-2021 and his statement was recorded under section 108 of the Act on 16-02-2021. In the statement the accused has stated that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he documents produced by the accused goes to show that he has issued reply in response to the summons referred above and in the said reply he has sought to providing with some documents by the department in connection with the allegations made against him. The complainant is silent about this reply in the remand application or in the objections filed by them for the bail application. Even, during the course of arguments, it is not clarified if the complainant/department has provided with the documents to the accused as sought for by him. Moreover, the complainant has also not denied about the reply given by the accused to the summons referred above. Further, on perusal of the documents produced by the accused, it also goes to show that anot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t which is to be exercised judiciously. There is no hard and fast rule and no inflexible principle governing the exercise of such discretion by the court. The facts and circumstances of each case will govern the exercise of judicial discretion in granting or refusing bail. Here, in the case on hand, as discussed supra, it is not the case of the I.O that investigation is pending. The only ground for rejection of bail is at Para No.10 of the objection which states that the accused did not co-operate through the investigation and he failed to appear before the I.O., but this statement is falsified by the documents produced by the accused which is also discussed supra. Only, if the investigation is not complete and if the accused is released on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
