TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1297
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n filed praying for following reliefs :- "(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the Respondent to produce the corpus/ petitioner before this Hon'ble Court and declare the arrest, detention, remand and continued custody of the petitioner in Case No.1490-A/ 2026, under Sections- 19 (1) (b) & 19 (1) (1)) of Central Excise Act, 1944, Commissionerate Meerut, as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the release of the petitioner. (ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned Remand Order dated 14.05.2026 (Annexure No.5) passed by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure under the relevant provisions of Central Excise Act, 1944. 5. The brief profile of the petitioner was generated, without mentioning any DIN for his alleged prosecution under the Central Excise Act, 1944, that too without mentioning the factum of his prior arrest on 24.04.2026. 6. The officials of the Respondent Department initiated the proceedings under the pretext that free movement of the petitioner may adversely affect the investigation of the case, in as much as, he may tamper with the evidence or induce, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to prevent him from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Official and that his arrest was deemed necessary for fair investigation of the case ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., if not taken into custody. The said grounds are apparently illusionary and arbitrary, as the petitioner who is already languishing in jail is not in a position to either tamper with the evidences or influence the witnesses or to hamper further investigation. Thus, the entire exercise is clearly an eye wash actuated to somehow make the petitioner languish behind the bars. Even the reasons to believe contained in the said document are evasive and illusionary, being based upon absolutely false and incorrect facts. No proceeding u/s 12 (f) of Central Excise Act, 1944, relating to Search and Seizure has been initiated, nor there is any justifiable reason for seeking remand of the petitioner at such a belated stage without mentioning any urgenc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tely illegal and mechanical on the face of it, as there was no occasion for the Remand Magistrate to grant the remand of the petitioner, once the reasons for seeking remand were palpably false and incorrect on the face of it. The Remand Magistrate committed illegality apparent on the face of record in ignoring the fact that neither any search or seizure proceedings were conducted under the Central Excise Act, 1944, nor the approval of the Commissioner or Grounds of Arrest or Reasons to Believe take notice of the fact that the petitioner is already in jail and that he in no manner could have interfered with the investigation or tamper with the witnesses / evidences. The petitioner has been merely made the sign upon the documents while he was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... denied by the respondents. There is also no specific averment regarding compliance with the departmental guidelines in that regard. Further, the "Reasons to Believe" placed on record appear to be vague and evasive. It is also noteworthy that neither the grounds of arrest nor the "Reasons to Believe" bear the seal or signature of the Principal Commissioner of Central Excise/Commissioner, Central Excise. Prima facie, the remand order appears to have been passed in a mechanical manner without due application of mind and, therefore, cannot be sustained in law. 15. We further find that the respondent has averred in paragraph 37 of the counter affidavit that provision of Section 35 (3) of B.N.S.S are not mandatory, which cannot be accepted. I....