https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44983 In a customs smuggling matter, the Delhi HC noted that bail may be interfered with only if the discretion was exercised arbitrarily or capriciously. Although there were reservations about unequal treatment compared with another accused in a similar case, the respondent had already spent over 70 days in custody, the investigation had substantially progressed, and there was no material showing risk of absconding or witness tampering. On those facts, cancellation was not warranted and the revision challenging the bail order failed. en-us Tue, 28 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 14:29:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44983 In a customs smuggling matter, the Delhi HC noted that bail may be interfered with only if the discretion was exercised arbitrarily or capriciously. Although there were reservations about unequal treatment compared with another accused in a similar case, the respondent had already spent over 70 days in custody, the investigation had substantially progressed, and there was no material showing risk of absconding or witness tampering. On those facts, cancellation was not warranted and the revision challenging the bail order failed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 28 Jul 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44983