TARLOCHAN SINGH Vs. CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code for grant of bail to the petitioner who is the accused in a Customs case involving offences under Sections 132 and 135(l)(a) of the Customs Act. The petitioner was arrested on 3rd October, 1999 at the IGI Airport, New Delhi and Indian currency worth Rs. 6,65,000.00 and U.K. Pounds of the value of Rs. 2,07,000.00 were recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner was about to proceed to tondon from New Delhi by an Air India flight. The complaint against the petitioner has already been filed in the Court and the passport of the petitioner has been seized and it is stated to be in the custody of the Court.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the punishment for an offence under Section 132 of the Customs Act is imprisonment for a term upto six months or fine or both, and the punishment for offence under Section 135(l)(a) is imprisonment for a term upto three months or fine or both. Hence according to the learned counsel for the petitioner imprisonment in not a mandatory punishment for the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that investigation has been completed and complaint has been filed in court and hence the custody of the petitioner is not required for the purpose of investigation. As far as the availability of the petitioner for facing trial is concerned, learned counsel submits that the passport of the petitioner is already in the custody of the Court and that the petitioner is willing to abide by any condition imposed by this Court for the purpose of ensuring his availability for trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner also points out that the petitioner is an infirm person and is suffering from illness and physical disabilities and, therefore, his application for grant of bail should be considered sympathetically and favourably.

(3.) Mr. Bhushan appearing for the respondent opposes the grant of bail to the petitioner mainly on the ground that he is a foreigner who committed serious economic offence and that he may flee from justice if he is released on bail. He further submits that in case this Court is inclined to release .him on bail sufficient conditions may be imposed to ensure that he will be available for trial.