Bail conditions and investigation cooperation: refusal of regular bail where anticipatory bail terms were allegedly breached.

Anticipatory bail carries an obligation to comply with its conditions, and a litigant who derives benefit from a protective order cannot disregard them. The HC noted repeated summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act and the petitioner's failure to appear before investigators. Given the alleged non-cooperation and the seriousness of the economic offence involving customs duty evasion, further protection was considered likely to hinder the inquiry. The Court therefore declined to set aside the order refusing regular bail and refused enlargement on regular bail.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to have the order refusing regular bail set aside and to be enlarged on bail, despite the alleged breach of the conditions of anticipatory bail and non-cooperation with the investigation.

Analysis: The petitioner had obtained anticipatory bail and thereafter sought regular bail instead of complying with the conditions attached to the protective order. The Court held that a litigant who takes advantage of a court order is expected to observe its conditions. The record also showed repeated summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act and the petitioner's failure to appear before the investigating officers. In view of this conduct, further protection was considered likely to impede the ongoing inquiry into a serious economic offence involving alleged customs duty evasion of large magnitude.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to have the impugned order set aside or to be granted regular bail.

---