Anticipatory bail deemed premature where customs enquiry summons existed and no immediate apprehension of arrest was shown.

An application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in a customs investigation was treated as premature because the respondent stated that the petitioner had already been summoned for enquiry under Section 108 of the Customs Act and that no immediate apprehension of arrest existed. In that setting, the Court declined to examine territorial jurisdiction and refused to proceed on the bail request at that stage. The operative point is that anticipatory bail was not considered appropriate where the record showed only a summons for enquiry and no immediate threat of arrest.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to anticipatory bail when the respondent stated that no immediate apprehension of arrest existed and the petitioner had already been summoned for enquiry.

Analysis: The application was moved under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with a customs investigation. The respondent's stand was that the petitioner had been summoned for enquiry under Section 108 of the Customs Act and that there was no immediate apprehension of arrest. In that situation, the Court declined to enter into the question of territorial jurisdiction and treated the anticipatory bail request as premature.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was refused as the application was premature.

---