ASHOK KUMAR Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is on anticipatory bail granted by the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, has filed this petition for the release of the passport to enable him to go abroad.

(2.) THE petitioner is alleged to be a partner of M/s. ATM International, Jalandhar, which is an Export Oriented Unit. In December, 2000 a case against the proprietor of the firm under the name and style of M/s. Megna Impex, Jalandhar, was registered on the ground that the firm was wrongly availing the benefit granted under Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme (DEPB) by submitting forged/false export documents and, thus, caused revenue loss to the State exchequer. One Satbir Singh is stated to be the proprietor of the said firm. The petitioner is one of the accused in the said case. He was arrested on December 22, 2002. As the Customs Authorities failed to file the challan within the mandatory period of 60 days, the petitioner was released on bail by the Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide order dated February 22, 2001 (Annexure P -1), by granting him the benefit under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Thereafter, the Customs Authorities started investigating the firms under the name and style of M/s. Golden Tools International, Jalandhar, and M/s. ATM International, Jalandhar. On the apprehension that he would be implicated in some other offence, the petitioner moved an application for grant of anticipatory bail, which was granted to him by the learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide order dated July 24, 2001 (Annexure P -2). While granting the anticipatory bail, the learned Sessions Judge, inter alia, imposed the condition that the petitioner shall not leave the country and he shall surrender his passport before the concerned Customs Officer. As in connection with some business dealings, the petitioner wanted to go to Dubai, he applied to the Court for the release of his passport on August 27, 2001. The petitioner was permitted to visit Dubai from September 22, 2001 to October 3, 2001 on his furnishing sureties and bail bonds etc., and his passport was ordered to be released by the Sessions Judge vide order dated September 13, 2001 (Annexure P -3). Against the order passed by the Sessions Judge, the Customs Authorities filed Criminal Revision No. 1443 of 2001 before this Court. The said revision petition was allowed vide order dated April 22, 2002 (Annexure P4) by this Court. The Special Leave Petition filed by the petitioner against the order passed by this Court was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

(3.) ON the other hand, it has been argued by Shri R.S. Rai, learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Union of India, that in case the petitioner is allowed to go abroad, he might not return back because the evasion of duty is considerable and huge. He further submits that the petitioner should have approached the Court of Session in the first instance and sought permission to go abroad from the Court. He has further argued that on an earlier occasion also, the permission granted to the petitioner to visit Dubai was refused by the High Court and subsequently, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court.