High Court clarifies bail criteria for Customs offenses, emphasizes precedent validity

The High Court of Bombay considered an anticipatory bail application related to alleged offenses during a Customs investigation. The applicant argued for bail due to the offenses being bailable and unnecessary custodial interrogation. The lower court failed to follow binding precedent, prompting the High Court to emphasize the precedence's validity until overturned. Both parties agreed to reconsider the bail application in the lower court, with directions for an expedited process and continued interim protection for the applicant, contingent on cooperation with the Investigating Officer.

---

---

Issues involved: Application for anticipatory bail based on the classification of alleged offences as bailable or non-bailable, and the lower court's failure to follow binding precedent.

Summary:
The High Court of Bombay heard an application for anticipatory bail where the applicant sought protection from arrest in connection with an investigation by the Commissioner of Customs. The applicant argued that the alleged offences were bailable and that custodial interrogation was unnecessary. The Additional Sessions Judge, however, did not follow the binding precedent set by the High Court and the Supreme Court, leading to a grave error. The High Court emphasized that a judgement stayed by a higher court remains binding until quashed or set aside. Both parties agreed to restore the anticipatory bail application to the Sessions Court for a fresh decision based on merits and the law. The Sessions Judge was directed to expedite the process within four weeks, with the interim protection for the applicant to continue until the application's disposal, while also requiring the applicant to cooperate with the Investigating Officer when summoned.

---