JUGAL KISHORE DAWER Vs. D R I

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Notice. Mr Aggarwal accepts notice. However, he wants that this matter be taken up after two days as he says that the petitioner is involved in evasion of customs duty to the extent of about Rs.12.5 crores. He further submits that the petitioner has been absconding and investigation is pending. Mr Aggarwal also relied upon the decision of the Supreme court in the case of Jagtar Singh v Satender Kaur @ Bhavana Grover & Ors ?" 2002(6) SCALE 177 and in particular he has relied upon the sentence of which reads as under: ?oNormally, when the accused are absconding, there is no question of granting anticipatory bail or regular bail . ? Mr Aggarwal also relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Enforcement Officer, TED, Bombay v Bher Chand Tikaji Bora 2000(121) ELT 7 (SC). He submits that unless the petitioner establishes that he is being unnecessarily harassed by the investigating agency, the court would not be justified in invoking jurisdiction under section 438 Cr.P.C. and in granting anticipatory bail thereunder.

(2.) Since Mr Aggarwal has made final arguments in this matter and has submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to any protection whatsoever, instead of taking up the hearing of the matter after a short notice of two days, the application is taken up for disposal straight away. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he would like to now address the arguments for a final decision in this matter.

(3.) The learned counsel first of all pointed out that it is an incorrect statement that there is an evasion of duty to the extent of Rs. 12.5 crores. He submits that although it was his brother Devinder Singh Dawer who was the main accused even as per the prosecution case, it is still a point of fact that the alleged export were to the extent of Rs.12.5 crores and the duty drawback amount was roughly about Rs.1.2 crores. The learned counsel for the prosecution was unable to quantify and specify as to how the amount of Rs.12.5 cores was said to have been evaded. The learned counsel for the petitioner further pointed out that according to the prosecution case itself, the person involved in the alleged offences was his brother Devinder Singh Dawer. He drew my attention to a copy of the application for judicial remand dated 2.7.2004 in respect of his brother. In that application in several places, it is revealed and stated by the Arresting Officer through the counsel Mr Satish Aggarwal, that the said Devinder Singh Dawer was the main person and controller of all these firms and is fully aware of the fraudulent availment of duty drawback. As per the remand application, it is the said Devinder Singh Dawer who assumed the role of an exporter, raised invoices at prices much higher than actual prices, claimed export promotion benefit etc. He thereafter, purchased foreign currency from local black market and deposited the same in the bank claiming it to be advance payment by foreign buyers. All these allegations were specific to Devinder Singh Dawer. The application for judicial remand also indicated that the firms that were operated by Devinder Singh Dawer were opened by him in the name of his relatives and other persons.