TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1460
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5 in R.A. No.581 of 2025, in connection with File No. DRI/MZU/CI/INT-77/2025, punishable under Section 135(1)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, the court of ACJM, 19th Court Esplanade, Mumbai by invoking jurisdiction vide section 480 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, respondent accused was conferred with bail and thus, by upholding his liberty, he was enlarged on bail. Being disgruntled with such liberty of bail, the prosecution has knocked doors of this Court with imploring stance of cancellation of said bail. 3. Per applicant, the impugned order dated 02.08.2025 is illegal, perverse and unsustainable in the eyes of law. The learned Magistrate erred in not considering the facts of the matter in its true perspective. The file pertains to serious offences however, the learned Magistrate failed to consider gravity of the offence. The impugned order has curtailed the investigation power of the applicant. Further custodial interrogation with the respondent accused is utmost necessary. New facts have been emerged during subsequent investigation and considering such exigency applicant deserves more time and opportunity to make substantial progress specifically in the backdrop of section 1....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ntainable. The order dated 02.08.2025 passed by the Learned JMFC granting bail is a detailed and reasoned order. The Learned Magistrate has considered all aspects including the stage of investigation, the material seized, and the conduct of the accused. There is no legal infirmity in the said order. The Respondent has complied with every condition imposed by the Learned JMFC. There is no allegation of breach of bail conditions at any point of time. After grant of bail, the Respondent filed an application before the Learned JMFC seeking permission to travel abroad for two times. The Learned JMFC, after hearing both sides, passed a detailed and reasoned order dated 30.08.2025, 03.10.2025 and 30.10.2025 allowing the Respondent to travel abroad with appropriate conditions. Hence Any Allegations for Violation of any condition does not subsist. In accordance with the permission granted and the undertaking submitted, the Respondent travelled to abroad and returned to India. De-facto the applicant has followed all conditions and thus the trial court deemed it fit to permanently return the passport of the respondent back to him following an earlier direction. This establishes the bona fide ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uctive to a fair trial to allow the accused to retain his freedom by enjoying the concession of bail during trial. Having said that, in case of cancellation of bail, very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing cancellation of bail (which was already granted)" A two Judge Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Daulat Ram v. State of Haryana (supra) laid down the grounds for cancellation of bail which are:- (i) Interference or attempt to interfere with the due course of administration of Justice. (ii) Evasion or attempt to evade the due course of Justice. (iii) Abuse of the concession granted to the accused in any manner. (iv) Possibility of accused absconding. (v) Likelihood of/actual misuse of bail. (vi) Likelihood of the accused tampering with the evidence or threatening witnesses. The Hon'ble Court further held in Dipak Yadao V/s State (Supra) that "It is no doubt true that cancellation of bail cannot be limited to the occurrence of supervening circumstances. This Court certainly has the inherent powers and discretion to cancel the bail of an accused even in the absence of supervening ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... respondent has attended IO as and when called by them. He has apparently co-operated in the investigation. In fact, he is not the person who has imported the impugned goods which are presently under investigation. Without prejudice, the applicant has already deposited Rs. 5 Crore with the Government Treasury as mark of his bona fides. He has responded all the summons issued by the applicant. He has supplied many documents amid investigation through Emils. Copy of those Emails is annexed at Exh.E with Additional Reply Below Exh.05. On medical grounds for one summons he could not attend the IO. I believe the case depends upon documentary material which is already in possession of the applicant. Thus, it is crystalline from record that there is no occasion of violation of condition imposed upon him. Ultimately, it cannot be inferred that the respondent accused has not complied the condition enumerated and imposed upon him, while granting bail. 14. With all the eloquence at his command, learned SPP Mr. S.R. Pathak for the applicant agency canvased that the impugned order passed by the trial court is perverse, illegal and bad in law. The learned Magistrate has not considered the gra....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d commit him to custodial interrogation with the applicant. De facto the applicant agency is at liberty to approach the trial court and move desired application for availing reliefs vide Section 187 of BNSS. 17. In the backdrop, I have pore over list of citations and cases relied upon by the applicant agency. Indeed, the law elucidated therein is guiding factor to this court but on the touchstone of facts and legal position, they differ with the facts of case in hand, thus they are not squarely applicable thereby deriving benefits in favour of the applicant. 18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while enlightening upon cancellation of bail expounded that the power to take back in custody an accused who has been enlarged on bail has to be exercised with care and circumspection. But the power, though of an extraordinary nature, is meant to be exercised in appropriate cases when, by a preponderance of probabilities, it is clear that the accused is interfering with the course of justice by tampering with witnesses. A useful reference on the point can be made from the verdict delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Delhi Admn. V/s Sanjay Gandhi, (AIR 1978 SC 961.) In....