Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a customs offence involving alleged smuggling, where the applicant had not cooperated with investigation and the allegations disclosed a prima facie role in the offence.
Analysis: The allegations related to smuggling of foreign-origin gold and the material on record indicated a prima facie role of the applicant. The Court treated the matter as one involving an economic offence and relied on the settled principle that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy to be granted only in exceptional cases. It also noted that the applicant had not cooperated with the investigation, which weighed against exercise of discretion in his favour. The authorities cited by the applicant were found inapplicable on the facts, while the principles governing cautious exercise of anticipatory bail jurisdiction were found to support refusal of relief.
Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was declined.
Final Conclusion: The application for pre-arrest protection did not merit interference on the facts and circumstances of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: Anticipatory bail in an economic offence is an exceptional discretionary relief and may be refused where the allegations disclose a prima facie role and the applicant has not cooperated with investigation.