Anticipatory bail in Customs Act inquiry refused where arrest apprehension was premature and summons were not cooperated with.

Anticipatory bail was declined in a Customs Act inquiry because the apprehension of arrest was premature while the matter remained at the stage of recording statements under Section 108. The Court noted that the authority had not yet determined whether the material disclosed misdeclaration or warranted further action, including arrest under Section 104. The petitioners' failure to cooperate with repeated summons also weighed against relief, and the cited precedent was held inapplicable on the facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail on the basis of apprehended arrest in proceedings under the Customs Act.

Analysis: The petitioners had been summoned under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 for recording statements in connection with an inquiry relating to alleged misdeclaration and possible offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. The apprehension of arrest was found to be premature because the inquiry was still at the stage of recording statements and the authority had yet to assess whether the material warranted further action, including arrest under Section 104 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court also noted that the petitioners had not cooperated with repeated summons and that the cited precedent did not assist them on the facts of the case.

Conclusion: The petitioners were not entitled to anticipatory bail.

---