9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e applicant that how the provisions of law are not complied with while sampling the recovered gold. Seizure memo was prepared as per the provision, which is on record. The statement of accused-applicant is recorded by DRI which is signed by the applicant and the same is on record as annexure no.3 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of DRI. The statements of other three co-accused were also recorded by the DRI, which was signed by them and same is on record as annexure nos.4 to 6, to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of DRI. Whatever it may be, from the materials on record and on hearing the rival submissions made by the respective learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that this is not a fit case to grant bai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered from the mixers, kept in the bags. 3. It is submitted that no permission order for seizure or arrest has been obtained from the higher officials of customs by the arresting party. The procedure laid down under sections 102 and 104 of Customs Act, has not been complied with. Seized articles are not recovered from the possession of applicant. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from his possession. The applicant has not given his statement voluntarily before custom officers and custom officers recorded his statement under section 108 of Customs Act in an arbitrary manner. Prosecution has failed to evaluate the duty on the recovered article. Prosecution is required to demonstrate that recovered goods are prohibited or that evas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere brought to the office of DRI Gomtinagar, Lucknow and foreign origin gold total 12 Bars, net weight 2441.500 grams valued at Rs. 1,49,90,810/ - were recovered from their belongings concealed in mixers and wheels of trolley bag. All the accused were duly produced before the concerned Magistrate for permission of their screen/X-ray of their bodies and with the permission of court, X-ray was conducted of their bodies and no gold were recovered from their bodies. All the four accused persons failed to produce any valid document regarding the recovered foreign origin gold. Valuation was conducted by approved local government assayer Shri Rajesh Kumar Gupta, M/s Badri Narain Laxmi Narain Jewellers, Rajkamal Hotel Building, Aminabad Road, Luck ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore DRI officers is confessional statements and admissible in evidence. The value, quantification of recovered gold, including the sampling was conducted by approved assayer and smuggle gold was found to be confiscated under section 119 of the Customs Act. All the four accused were supplied the gold by one and the same person Mr. Syyed of Dubai to be handed over to the persons out side of Lucknow Airport. Bail Application is false misleading and incorrect and if the applicant is released on bail he shall not co-operate with the trial, hence, counsel of DRI has vehemently opposed the bail applicant. 6. I have heard the rival submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers annexed with the bail application as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. I have visited the provisions of section 104 of the Customs Act, including Sub-section 4 thereof. As per Section 104(1) of the Customs Act, if a person has committed offence, inter alia, under Section 135 of the said Act, he may be arrested. Coming to Section 135 (1)(b)(i)(A) of the aforesaid Act, if the market price of the goods exceeds Rs. 1 crore, the same is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 7 (seven) years and with fine and as such, such an offence is non-bailable. 10. Learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted, referring to the case of Commr. of C. Ex. S.T., Lucknow -vrs- Mohd. Halim Mohd. Shamim Khan (order dated 13.09.2017 in Appeal No. C/70595/2016-SM) that the gold seized in this case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o specific allegation on behalf of the applicant that how the provisions of law are not complied with while sampling the recovered gold. Seizure memo was prepared as per the provision, which is on record. The statement of accused-applicant is recorded by DRI which is signed by the applicant and the same is on record as annexure no.3 to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of DRI. The statements of other three co-accused were also recorded by the DRI, which was signed by them and same is on record as annexure nos.4 to 6, to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of DRI. 13. Whatever it may be, from the materials on record and on hearing the rival submissions made by the respective learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
