Anticipatory bail reconsideration required where complainant's objections were not addressed in a serious smuggling prosecution.

Anticipatory bail granted in a customs-smuggling prosecution was set aside because the impugned order did not show consideration of the complainant's written objections. Given the serious allegations of gold smuggling, the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication, with directions to hear both sides again and consider the complainant's objections and any further submissions. The effect was to require a reconsideration of the bail request on a proper hearing record.

---

---

Issues: Whether the anticipatory bail order deserved to be quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration on the ground that the complainant's objections were not dealt with.

Analysis: The application sought cancellation of anticipatory bail granted in a customs-smuggling prosecution. The order under challenge did not reflect consideration of the complainant's written objections, and the allegations were of a serious nature involving smuggling of gold. In these circumstances, the Court found it appropriate to exercise discretion in favour of the applicant and require the bail request to be reconsidered after hearing both sides afresh.

Conclusion: The anticipatory bail order was quashed and the matter was remanded to the learned Additional Sessions Judge for fresh decision after considering the complainant's objections and further submissions, if any.

---