Court Limits Writ Petitions on Arrest Powers Under Customs Act, Urges Authorities to Follow Law Without Granting Relief.

The HC declined to entertain the writ petition under Art. 226 regarding arrest powers under Sec. 108 of the Customs Act, emphasizing that such petitions should be sparingly exercised. The court acknowledged the petition's maintainability but directed respondent authorities to act per the law, disposing of the petition without granting reliefs.

---

---

Issues Involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the power to arrest under Section 108 of the Customs Act 1962, and the applicability of bail provisions for offences under the Customs Act.

Maintainability of Writ Petition:
The Union of India raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition, arguing that the power to arrest a person under the Customs Act should not be interfered with by the court. Citing a judgment of the Apex Court, it was emphasized that statutory powers of arrest must be based on objective facts of an offense committed. The Union of India also contended that the provisions of Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be invoked when summoned under Section 108 of the Customs Act. Referring to previous judgments, it was argued that pre-arrest protection is not a guaranteed right and should be sparingly exercised by the High Court.

Power to Arrest under Customs Act:
The petitioner, on the other hand, relied on a Supreme Court judgment to argue that offenses under the Customs Act should be considered bailable, similar to offenses under the Central Excise Act. The petitioner emphasized that Customs Officers have the power to release on bail upon arrest for non-cognizable offenses under the Customs Act. Previous judgments were cited to support the argument that offenses under the Customs Act should be considered bailable, and bail should be granted in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

Disposition of Writ Petition:
The High Court, after considering the arguments presented, decided not to entertain the writ petition at that stage. It was emphasized that the respondent authorities should proceed in accordance with the law. The court acknowledged the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 but highlighted that such power should be sparingly exercised. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of without granting the reliefs sought by the petitioner.

---