2024 (5) TMI 817

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sion of the learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the prosecution case, the appellant while travelling from Sharjah to Lucknow was intercepted at the arrival of the Airport at Lucknow. Upon the scanning of the baggage of the applicant, three cartons of foreign origin cigarettes, total 56,000/- cigarettes was valued at Rs. 8,40,000/- was recovered. Since the aforesaid consignment was not declared and was sought to be smuggled, hence, the same was seized. The further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the maximum punishment under Section 135 of the Customs Act is up to 7 years. It is further submitted that the signatures of the applicant were forcibl....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and odd, hence, the offence is cognizable and non-bailable. In the aforesaid circumstances, the applicant is not entitled for bail. The Court has considered the rival submissions and also perused the material on record. Apparently, in so far as the statement whether the recovery from all the co-accused is to be clubbed is a subject matter to considered and decided during trial. At this stage where the bail is being considered in terms of Section 135 of the Customs Act, the goods as alleged to have been smuggled and recovered allegedly from the applicant is valued of Rs. 8,40,000/- and as per Section 135 since the evasion of duty is less than Rs. 30,00,000/-, consequently, the offence carries a maximum sentence up to 7 years and also notic....