TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (7) TMI 1081
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 135 (1) (b) (A), 135 (1) (c) (A) and 135 (A) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Heard Sri. Sachin. B.S, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Aravind. V Chavan, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent -State. Perused the materials on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is arrayed as accused No. 3. He is innocent and law abiding citizen. He has not committed any offences as alleged. He has been falsely implicated in the matter, without any basis. He was apprehended on 19.05.2024 and since then, he is in judicial custody even though he is not required for further investigation. Accused Nos. 1 and 2, from whom the diamonds and the foreign currencies said to have been recovered, are already enlarged ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of grounds of arrest is not in compliance of the requirement of law about communicating the grounds of arrest to the accused and such communication violates the constitutional requirements under Article 22 (1) of the Constitution of India and the statutory mandate under Section 104 of Customs Act. Therefore, he prays for allowing the petition. 7. Per Contra, learned standing counsel for the respondent opposing the petition submitted that even though, the diamonds worth Rs. 7.77 crores and foreign currencies worth Rs. 4.62 Lakhs were recovered from accused Nos. 1 and 2, they were only agents to carry the valuables i.e., the smuggled articles from India to Dubai. But it was as per the instructions of accused No. 3. The statement of Syed Wafa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w Union of Inida 1995 Supp (4) SCC 663 and Gulam Hussain Shaikh Chougule v/s S. Reynolds, Supdt. of Customs, Marmgo (2002) 1 SCC 155 in support of his contention that unlike the statement recorded under 161 of Cr.P.C, the statement under Section 108 of Customs Act was not recorded by the police but by the Customs Authority and the same is admissible in law. 9. Learned counsel further submitted that a look out notice was issued against the petitioner on the basis of the statements of accused Nos. 1 and 2. Accordingly, accused No. 3 was intercepted in Mumbai Airport by Airport Authorities and they informed the respondent. Later, the petitioner was brought to Bengaluru and he was questioned on 18.05.2024 and on 19.05.2024 after issuing necess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the accused was illegal. But the facts of the present case are entirely different and therefore, the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Prabir Purkayashta (supra) cannot be made applicable to the present case. 12. Learned counsel further submitted that the order of the Trial Court dated 19.05.2024 discloses that learned Judge has satisfied himself about compliance of the requirement of law while apprehending and producing the petitioner before the Court. Therefore, he prays for dismissal of the petition. 13. In view of the rival contentions urged by the learned counsel for both the parties, the point that would arise for my consideration is: "Whether the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.?" ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....24. The portion of the arrest memo dated 19.05.2024 signed by the petitioner reads as under: "3. Accordingly, SRI,. SYED SAJJID ALI son/daughter of SRI SYED ALI ASKER has been placed under arrest and has been explained the grounds of his arrest. He was also informed about his right to have someone informed about his arrest and MY FATHER SHRI SYED ALI ASKER has been informed about his arrest." (emphasis supplied) 17. It is not in dispute that it is the contention of the respondent that the grounds of arrest were verbally communicated to the petitioner and admittedly, such grounds were never communicated in writing. In that view of the matter the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Prabir Purkayashta (supra) assumes importance. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ding the accused on 19.05.2024 may not vitiate the arrest and detention of the petitioner, cannot be accepted. The requirement of communicating the grounds of arrest and detention to the accused in writing, in the language known to him is the requirement of law and there cannot be any compromise in the same. Therefore, prima facie non-compliance of such requirement, which is the mandate of law naturally vitiates the arrest and detention of the petitioner. Therefore, the contention taken by the learned counsel for the respondent that such grounds of arrest were referred to in the remand application and the copy of which was served on the counsel representing the respondent will not cure the defect and cannot be accepted as due compliance of ....