Anticipatory bail denied in alleged prohibited export probe, as custodial interrogation was found necessary to trace the wider conspiracy.

Anticipatory bail was refused in a Customs Act investigation concerning the alleged export of prohibited red sandal logs. The Court treated the consignment as misdeclared cargo, noted the applicant's role as sender, and found that his replies to summons did not clarify the recipient or the e-way bills. Because the inquiry required tracing the wider conspiracy and identifying possible involvement of persons at the ICD or outside parties, the Court considered custodial interrogation necessary and found that the conditions for anticipatory bail were not satisfied.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant in connection with the alleged export of prohibited red sandal logs and the inquiry under the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis: The applicant was the sender of the consignment and, in response to summons, claimed ignorance about the proposed recipient and the e-way bills. The Court treated the alleged misdeclared cargo as red sandal logs, a prohibited export item, and noted that the quantity and value involved were substantial. In these circumstances, the Court found that further investigation was required to trace the entire conspiracy and to ascertain whether persons at the ICD or outsiders were involved. The Court held that custodial interrogation of the applicant was necessary and that the conditions for grant of anticipatory bail were not made out.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was refused to the applicant.

---