9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestigation is pre qualified with the words inquiry which should be sufficient to come to a conclusion that as on those dates, it was a mere summon issued by the DRI and nothing more. Thus, this submission of the learned senior counsel is untenable in law. Apprehension, arising from the contents of the reply filed by the DRI and supported by an officer of the rank of Deputy Director - HELD THAT:- The contents of the reply, at best, could be what one can plainly construe as what the inquiry uptill that date have revealed. The applicant not having participated in the inquiry as contemplated under Section 108 of the Act cannot be heard to say that on the one hand he will not appear, and on the other use the same to his advantage to say that the inquiry uptil that date prejudices his stand and therefore, is a clear pointer to the apprehension of arrest. The apprehension or reasons to believe are believed by the fact that the DRI, as of now, has neither any proposal nor has applied for sanction for the arrest of the applicant. That apart, this Court is also of the considered opinion that unless the applicant appears before the DRI and offers himself for tendering voluntary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 108 of Customs Act, 1962 (for short the Act ) is a misnomer since the DRI has already made up its mind to arrest the applicant. 6. To support the aforesaid submissions, learned senior counsel draws attention of this Court to the notices issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act issued by the DRI, whereby the applicant has been directed to appear in an inquiry in connection with investigation in respect of imported goods by M/s Green Globe . According to learned senior counsel the use of the word investigation stands in contradistinction to the word inquiry inasmuch as the investigation is a stage where the agency could, if so required, arrest any person who appears to it to be culpable in any of the cognizable offences. In other words, learned senior counsel submits that the apprehension of arrest as contemplated under Section 438 Cr.P.C, 1973 is present and real and established simply by the issuance of notices for the purposes of investigation . 7. That apart, learned senior counsel also invites attention of this Court to the reply filed by the DRI particularly to para 8 sub-para (iii) to submit that the allegation contained in the sub para themselves ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its that the applicant has his roots well entrenched in the society, is a permanent resident of Delhi and is a family man and will not be a flight risk at all. He further submits that having regard to the fact that the allegations are in respect of an economic offence for which the evidences are primarily being in form of documents, no purpose even otherwise would be served in directing the applicant to be remanded to custodial interrogation. 11. Per contra, Mr. Aggarwala, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent/DRI submits that this is a fit case, where this Court ought to dismiss the said anticipatory bail application with heavy costs. At the outset, learned senior standing counsel submits that the applicant was asked to appear before the Senior Intelligence Officer (for short SIO ) competent authority for the purpose of recording voluntary statement under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962, for which 5 summons dated 18.04.2023, 25.04.2023 23.06.2023 30.06.2023 and 27.07.2023 were issued to the applicant. Despite such issuance of summons, the applicant had not appeared even on one occasion and has been evading the inquiry on one pretext or the other. According to lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere is neither any proposal nor any application seeking approval or a sanction of the competent authority has been submitted to the Competent Authority for the purposes of arresting the applicant. 15. So far as the judgment of Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia (supra) is concerned, learned senior standing counsel relies upon paragraphs explaining how the words, reason to believe , ought to be construed in respect of application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. According to learned counsel, the provision of anticipatory bail is a device to secure individual s liberty however, the same is not a passport for the commission of crime nor a shield against any or all kinds of accusation, likely or unlikely. 16. Thus, according to learned senior standing counsel the facts, the conduct of the applicant as also the judgments relied upon would sufficiently disentitle the applicant from seeking anticipatory bail. 17. This Court has heard the arguments of Mr. Hariharan learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicant as also Mr. Satish Aggarwala, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent and have also taken into consideration the reply and judgements filed on behalf of DRI. 18. At the outs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch should be sufficient to come to a conclusion that as on those dates, it was a mere summon issued by the DRI and nothing more. Thus, this submission of the learned senior counsel is untenable in law. 23. The other leg of the argument of the learned senior counsel is with respect to the apprehension, arising from the contents of the reply filed by the DRI and supported by an officer of the rank of Deputy Director. According to learned senior counsel, the contents of the reply, unequivocally points out towards the investigations/inquiry conducted by the DRI till that date and unerringly allege grave and serious infractions against the applicant. According to learned senior counsel, the contents convey as if the DRI has already concluded that the applicant is the master mind of the alleged transactions and offences. 24. This Court is unable to appreciate the aforesaid submissions. The contents of the reply, at best, could be what one can plainly construe as what the inquiry uptill that date have revealed. The applicant not having participated in the inquiry as contemplated under Section 108 of the Act cannot be heard to say that on the one hand he will not appear, and on the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... far as the judgment of Supreme Court in Padam Narain (supra) and Gurbaksh Singh (Supra) is concerned there is no quarrel on the preposition laid down by the Supreme Court on the words reasons to believe . However, in the present case, as observed aforesaid there are no cogent or plausible reasons to believe of being arrested and thus the judgments would not be applicable to the facts of the present case. That, coupled with the non appearance before DRI even once, settles the issue against the applicant. 28. Moreover, the aforesaid, apprehension or reasons to believe are belied by the fact that the DRI, as of now, has neither any proposal nor has applied for sanction for the arrest of the applicant. That apart, this Court is also of the considered opinion that unless the applicant appears before the DRI and offers himself for tendering voluntary statement or otherwise, there cannot be any question of any real time apprehension of being arrested. 29. The view of this Court taken above, finds support from the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in State of Gujarat vs. Choodamani (Supra) as also the judgment of Coordinate Bench of this Court in Manjodh Singh Cheema (Supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
