2024 (12) TMI 1324

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Goyal, Adv. ORDER PER 1. Union of India through Director of Revenue Intelligence, Jaipur has preferred this bail cancellation application under Section 439 (2) of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 17.10.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, whereby the accused-respondents were granted bail under Section 135 (1) (a) (b) of Customs Act. It is contended that the Court below misconstrued the circular No.13/2022 dated 16.08.2022 and enlarged the respondents on bail. Considering the matter falling in clause 2.3(b)(c) of circular. In contrast the case falls under Clause-b which reads as fallows:- "Cases of outright smuggling of high value goods such as precious meta....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....from their statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act. In contrast, no such retraction was on record, on the date of the impugned order. Likewise, the factual aspects narrated in Para-16 of the application were ignored, which expressly states that respondents-Anil Narayan Magar, Suraj Jalinder Suryavanshi and Shridhar Devdas Suryavanshi were complicit in smuggling the gold worth more than Rs. 1,00,30,000/-. It is fervently argued that gold worth Rs. 1,31,10,350/- was seized from the possession of respondent-Anil Narayan Magar. It is also argued that after recording the statement of respondent-Anil Narayan Magar, it was revealed that he was going to supply the said gold to Suraj Jalinder Suryavanshi. On the same day, respondent-Suraj Ja....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iferously contended that after grant of the bail, the Union of India has yet not filed any complaint against the respondents for prosecuting them under Section 135 (a) (b) of the Customs Act. The respondents have not breached the conditions of bail, they are regularly appearing. It is also contended that from the possession of Suraj Jalinder Suryavanshi and Shridhar Devdas Suryavanshi, no gold articles were recovered, mere presence of Suraj Jalinder Suryavanshi at the place indicated by the other co-accused, cannot be considered an offence under Section 135 (1) (a) (b) of the Customs Act. The trial has yet not commenced. It is also contended that at this stage, it cannot be said that the gold allegedly found in the possession of Anil Naraya....