Customs smuggling bail refused where prima facie links, unretracted statements and alleged repeat involvement weighed against release pending trial.

Bail in a customs smuggling prosecution was refused because the court found the accused was prima facie linked to the transaction, including alleged arrangement of travel and foreign exchange, and had not retracted his statement. The voluntariness and admissibility of statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act were treated as matters for trial, not for final determination at the bail stage. The court also relied on the gravity of the alleged offence and the petitioner's asserted prior involvement in similar smuggling cases, which together weighed against release pending trial.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in a customs smuggling case involving statements recorded under the Customs Act and allegations of repeated involvement in similar offences.

Analysis: The Court held that the voluntariness and admissibility of the statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act could not be finally determined at the bail stage and had to be examined at trial. On the material then available, the petitioner was prima facie linked to the smuggling transaction, had allegedly arranged travel and foreign exchange, and had not retracted his statement. The Court also placed weight on the gravity of the offence and the petitioner's alleged prior involvement in similar smuggling cases, treating these factors as negativing the claim for bail.

Conclusion: Bail was declined; the petitioner was not entitled to be released pending trial.

---