Regular bail and disputed clubbing of recoveries were treated as a trial issue after separate cases involving father and son.

Regular bail was granted where the prosecution sought to club foreign currency recovered from the petitioner with currency allegedly recovered in a separate earlier case against his son. The Court noted that the petitioner was not an accused in the case against his son, and the son was not an accused in the present case. On that basis, it treated the clubbing of recoveries as a debatable issue requiring examination at trial, rather than a basis to deny bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail where the prosecution sought to club the currency recovered from a separate earlier case involving the petitioner's son with the recovery made from the petitioner in the present case.

Analysis: The petitioner was arrested in the present case and a specified quantity of foreign currency was recovered from him. The prosecution relied on statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 to contend that the amount recovered from the petitioner and his son should be treated as one combined recovery. The Court found that the petitioner was not an accused in the case registered against his son, and the son was not an accused in the present case. In these circumstances, whether the recovery in the separate case could be clubbed with the present recovery was held to be a debatable question fit to be examined by the Trial Court during trial.

Conclusion: The petitioner was granted regular bail.

---