https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450123 A writ petition under Article 226 seeking pre-arrest protection in a customs matter was held maintainable, but the High Court reiterated that such extraordinary jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly and only in appropriate cases. In the context of summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act and apprehended arrest, the court noted the settled position that customs arrest powers cannot be routinely curtailed by anticipatory relief and that statutory safeguards must be observed in any action taken. On the facts, the court declined to grant pre-arrest protection, dismissed the petition, and directed the authorities to proceed in accordance with law. en-us Mon, 12 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Feb 2024 08:35:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450123 A writ petition under Article 226 seeking pre-arrest protection in a customs matter was held maintainable, but the High Court reiterated that such extraordinary jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly and only in appropriate cases. In the context of summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act and apprehended arrest, the court noted the settled position that customs arrest powers cannot be routinely curtailed by anticipatory relief and that statutory safeguards must be observed in any action taken. On the facts, the court declined to grant pre-arrest protection, dismissed the petition, and directed the authorities to proceed in accordance with law. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 12 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450123