Customs arrest powers cannot be blocked by a blanket anticipatory bail condition or mandatory prior notice requirement.

Customs officers' statutory power of arrest under the Customs Act operates where they have reason to believe a specified offence has been committed, subject to safeguards such as disclosure of arrest grounds and prompt production before a magistrate. Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC cannot be granted as a blanket shield against unspecified future offences, and protection must rest on concrete, offence-specific facts. Statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act are distinct from police statements, and the mere issue of summons does not by itself curtail the customs authorities' arrest powers if objective material later justifies arrest. A High Court direction requiring ten days' prior notice before any non-bailable arrest was therefore impermissible and was set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court could, while disposing of anticipatory bail applications arising from summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, direct that the respondents not be arrested for any non-bailable offence without ten days' prior notice, and thereby impose a blanket restraint on the Customs authorities' statutory power of arrest.

Analysis: Section 104 of the Customs Act, 1962 authorises arrest by customs officers when they have reason to believe that an offence punishable under specified provisions has been committed, and the power is circumscribed by statutory safeguards such as communication of grounds of arrest and production before a magistrate without unnecessary delay. Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not permit a blanket anticipatory bail order covering offences not yet committed or accusations not yet levelled; any such protection must be specific and founded on concrete facts. Statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 are distinct from police statements and the mere issuance of summons does not justify fettering the customs officer's statutory power to arrest if an offence is later found on objective materials.

Conclusion: The High Court could not lawfully impose a blanket protection against arrest or a mandatory ten days' prior notice condition, and that part of the order was set aside.

---