2024 (11) TMI 621 - HC - Customs

Bail granted to accused in gold smuggling case under Section 135 Customs Act considering compoundable offense nature

Allahabad HC granted bail to accused charged under Section 135 of Customs Act, 1962 for possession of smuggled gold bars. Court considered that trial had ... Bail application filed u/s 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Allegation of possession of smuggled golden bars - HELD THAT:- As keeping in view the fact that in the matter trial has not started even yet and the complicity of the accused applicant is yet to be determined in trial, the gold seized is in the possession of the Department, the offence appears to be compoundable by virtue of Section 137(3) of the Customs Act and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial, no criminal antecedent to the credit of the applicant, his willingness and readiness to deposit the adequate customs duty over the said gold, the applicant is in jail since 23.5.2024, without commenting upon the merits of the case, the applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the accused-applicant is allowed. Let the applicant involved in case crime u/s 135 Customs Duty Act, 1962, Police Station D.R.I., District Varanasi be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iii) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. (iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (v) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. (vi) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Trial Court forthwith and shall not leave the country without previous permission of the Court. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Issues:1. Bail application filed under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962.2. Allegation of possession of smuggled golden bars.3. Claim of false implication by the applicant.4. Interpretation of provisions of the Customs Act.5. Consideration of bail application based on facts and circumstances.Detailed Analysis:1. The bail application was filed by the applicant under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962, in relation to a case involving the recovery of smuggled golden bars. The applicant was intercepted by D.R.I. Officers at a railway station, where the gold was found in his possession. The recovery was valued at Rs.1,47,44,174, and a complaint was filed, leading to the registration of Case No. 6 of 2024.2. The applicant claimed innocence and argued that he was falsely implicated in the case. It was contended that the alleged confession was fabricated, and no smuggled gold was recovered from his possession. The defense highlighted flaws in the investigation and lack of evidence linking the gold to the applicant. The applicant also challenged the rejection of his bail application by the Sessions Court, citing the compoundable nature of the offense under Section 114 of the Customs Act.3. The opposing party, represented by D.R.I., argued against the bail application, emphasizing the substantial quantity and value of the seized gold, which fell under the prohibited category. It was asserted that the applicant failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for the possession of illegal gold. D.R.I. maintained that the prosecution followed statutory provisions and that the severity of the offense warranted imprisonment for up to seven years under Section 135(i)(A) of the Customs Act.4. The court considered the submissions from both sides and examined the record. It noted that the trial had not commenced, and the applicant's involvement was yet to be established. Given the compoundable nature of the offense, the lack of adverse impact on the trial, the applicant's clean criminal record, and willingness to pay customs duty, the court granted bail to the applicant under Section 137(3) of the Customs Act.5. Consequently, the court allowed the bail application, ordering the release of the applicant on certain conditions, including appearance before the trial court, refraining from criminal activities, surrendering the passport, and compliance with specified terms. Breach of these conditions could lead to bail cancellation upon prosecution's application before the court.