Customs offences involving misdeclaration and prohibited imports can justify refusal of bail where prima facie material supports the allegations.

Prima facie material showing import of restricted and prohibited goods by misdeclaration and concealment justified refusal of bail. The allegations included lead scrap declared as zinc scrap and concealed live cartridges and empty cartridge casings, engaging the Customs Act, the Section 11 notification, the Foreign Trade Policy, and hazardous waste rules. The court treated the Section 108 statement and the material on the nature and value of the goods as sufficient at the bail stage. Given the gravity of the customs offences and the statutory prohibitions invoked, bail was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicant, facing allegations of illegal import of restricted and prohibited goods with misdeclaration and concealment, was entitled to bail.

Analysis: The allegations disclosed import of lead scrap shown as zinc scrap and concealment of live cartridges and empty cartridge casings, attracting the prohibitory regime under the Customs Act, 1962, the notification issued under Section 11 of that Act, and the Foreign Trade Policy and hazardous waste rules. The record, including the statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, and the material regarding value and nature of the imported goods, was treated as sufficient prima facie material at the stage of bail. In view of the gravity of the accusations and the statutory prohibitions invoked, the Court found no ground to enlarge the applicant on bail.

Conclusion: Bail was refused.

Ratio Decidendi: In a case involving serious customs offences with prima facie material of import of prohibited or restricted goods by misdeclaration, bail may be declined on the basis of the gravity of the and the statutory prohibitions involved.

---