9911796707
TMI Blog1989 (5) TMI 76X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Sh. J.S. Arora, learned counsel for the respondent and have given my careful consideration to the points involved. The main thrust of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that no revision is maintainable against an order granting bail by the learned Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi. Since revision itself is not maintainable, therefore, the order granting stay of the operation of the order of bail in itself was liable to be quashed. In this respect, learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to a case B.S. Rawat v. Andre Christopher Mydlarz and Others, 1988 (36) E.L.T. 60 (Bombay). However, this authority rather helps the case of the Customs Department because in that case also bail order was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... detention in jail may seriously affect his liberty. Learned counsel for the petitioner also cited Nilu and Others v. The State - 1983 Criminal Law Journal 1590, but that was a case on an entirely different footing. In that case an accused who had been granted bail earlier flouted conditions of the bail which led to its cancellation by the learned Sessions Judge. A revision was filed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge. In those circumstances, it was held that a revision petition against an order in which the bail had been cancelled by the learned Sessions Judge on the ground of flouting of condition by the accused could not be entertained. 4. In the case of Miss R. Shakuntala v. Roshan Lal Agarwal and Others, 1985 Criminal La ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clearly shows that a revisional court has ample power to cancel an order of bail which from its inception is considered to be unjust, illegal or amounts to gross mis-carriage of justice. In the case of Robert Lendi v. The Collector of Customs and Another - 1987 Crl. LJ. 55 = 1987 (30) E.L.T. 914 (Del.), it was held, that when an accused foreign national faced trial under Sections 132 and 135 of Customs Act in a serious case involving smuggling of huge quantity of gold, refusal of bail by the Magistrate was proper. The case in hand is also similar. The accused in this case is also a foreign national and is alleged to have smuggled gold weighing 1399.600 grams valued at Rs. 4,40,874/-. 6. I am, therefore, of the opinion that the revision be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
