Case Law Details
Sheik Mohideen Vs Senior Intelligence Officer (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court issued an order concerning the bail petition filed by Sheik Mohideen, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.09.2025. The petitioner was charged for offenses punishable under Sections 135(1)(a), 135(1)(b), and 135(1)(i)(A) of the Customs Act, 1962, in a case registered by the Senior Intelligence Officer.
The prosecution’s case is that the petitioner, along with other accused persons, smuggled 2299.920 grams of gold illegally from foreign countries. The Special Public Prosecutor further detailed that the gold, worth about Rs.2,58,18,901/-, was smuggled from Singapore to Madurai via Colombo. The prosecution strongly opposed bail, submitting that the petitioner might abscond if released.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent of the alleged offenses, is willing to abide by any conditions imposed by the Court, and has been in judicial custody since 23.09.2025.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, the Madras High Court decided to grant bail.
The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a bond for Rs.10,000/- with two sureties for a like sum, to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai.
The bail was granted subject to several further conditions, including:
- The petitioner must surrender his passport to the respondent.
- The petitioner shall not move out of India without prior permission from the respondent.
- The petitioner shall report before the respondent daily at 10:30 a.m. for a period of four weeks, and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
- The petitioner shall not abscond or tamper with evidence or witnesses during investigation or trial.
- The order stipulated that on breach of any condition, the Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action, and that a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS if the accused thereafter absconds.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
The Court made the following order :-
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.09.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 135 Customs Act 1962 under Sections 135(1)(a), 135(1)(b) and 135(1)(i)(A) in F.No.DRI/CZU/MDU/VIII/48/ENQ-01/INT-01-2025 on the file of the respondent. seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused persons had smuggled 2299.920 grams of gold illegally from foreign countries. Hence, the complaint.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has not committed any offences as alleged by the prosecution. He further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any conditions which may be imposed by this Court and he is in judicial custody from 23.09.2025. Hence, he seeks bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused persons had smuggled of 2299.920 grams of gold worth about of Rs.2,58,18,901/- from Singapore to Madurai via Colombo. He further submitted that if the petitioner is granted bail, he may abscond. Hence, he strongly opposed for grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. Taking into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
6. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madurai, and on further conditions that :-
[a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book
(b] The petitioner is directed to surrender his passport to the respondent. Further, the petitioner shall not move out of india without prior permission from the respondent and he shall report before the respondent daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter, as and when required for interrogation.
c) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.
d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial.
e) On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.
Author Bio
