Inherent jurisdiction to extend time for customs duty deposit and confirm anticipatory bail with cooperation conditions.

The High Court considered whether time for deposit of the balance customs duty could be extended in exercise of inherent jurisdiction and whether interim anticipatory bail should be confirmed. It extended the time for payment of the remaining amount up to 30.11.2022, taking into account that a substantial part of the assessed liability had already been paid, while preserving the trial court's power to pass further orders if default continued. It also confirmed interim anticipatory bail, holding that custodial interrogation was not warranted in view of the partial payment and the petitioner's undertaking to cooperate, join investigation, and comply with bail conditions.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the time granted by the trial Court for deposit of the balance customs duty could be extended under the Court's inherent jurisdiction; (ii) whether the petitioner was entitled to confirmation of interim anticipatory bail.

Issue (i): Whether the time granted by the trial Court for deposit of the balance customs duty could be extended under the Court's inherent jurisdiction.

Analysis: The dispute arose out of a substantial customs duty liability, and a large part of the assessed amount had already been deposited. The Court treated the remaining default in the context of the overall payment already made and exercised its inherent powers to consider whether further time ought to be granted. The Court also protected the trial Court's authority to pass appropriate orders if the balance amount was not deposited within the extended period.

Conclusion: The time for deposit of the balance amount was extended up to 30.11.2022, and the petition was allowed.

Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to confirmation of interim anticipatory bail.

Analysis: In view of the substantial amount already paid and the petitioner's undertaking to cooperate with the investigation, the Court held that custodial interrogation was not warranted. The interim protection earlier granted was continued, while preserving the petitioner's obligation to join investigation, cooperate with the Investigating Officer, and comply with the conditions of anticipatory bail.

Conclusion: The interim anticipatory bail was made absolute, subject to the stated conditions, and the petition was allowed.

Final Conclusion: Both petitions were granted relief, one by extending the time for payment of the balance duty and the other by confirming anticipatory bail with conditions, while preserving the authorities' liberty to act in accordance with law upon non-compliance.

Ratio Decidendi: Where substantial compliance with the monetary obligation has already been made and the accused undertakes continued cooperation, the Court may extend time for deposit and decline custodial interrogation, subject to enforceable conditions.

---