Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Dinesh Bhabootmal Salecha Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Bail Application (Stamp) No.21291 of 2022
Date of Judgement/Order : 23/12/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Dinesh Bhabootmal Salecha Vs Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (Bombay High Court)

Bombay High Court held that as arrest memo needs to contain the gist of offence alleged to have been committed. Absence of the same, makes arrest memo bereft of necessary particulars. Accordingly, bail granted to the applicant.

Facts- The Applicant, who is presently in judicial custody in A.No.1237 of 2022, seeks bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

It is the case of the first respondent that the syndicate in which the Applicant has played a major role, imported several consignments of iPhones giving mis-declaration and thereby leading to evasion of customs duty. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai Zonal Unit, Mumbai, had taken up a detailed investigation into a syndicate involved in smuggling of iPhones. It is alleged that the Applicant systematically misused his AEO status, breached the trust placed on him by the Government and smuggled mobile phones in large numbers into India.

Conclusion- Upon perusal of the Arrest Memo, it appears that the same does not contain any particulars of the case in which the Applicant was arrested. It does not contain any file number. No particulars of the offence, save and except stating the penal sections, are forthcoming from the Arrest Memo. The Arrest Memo should contain the gist of the offence alleged to have been committed. The Arrest Memo prima facie appears to be bereft of necessary particulars. The contention of the learned Counsel for the first respondent that in the past, the Applicant has suffered penalty under Customs Act, he was absconding for quite some time, he has been non-cooperative in the investigation, bail had been rejected by the Courts below, cannot justify non-compliance with the Constitutional imperatives and statutory obligations. It is a settled principle of law that the remand order does not cure the violation of Constitutional safeguards even to deny bail.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031