Johan Constantine Barretto v. Union of India and Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Anticipatory bail application in a customs matter; counsel for the Union was absent and the investigating officer assured no arrest of the applicant until the next date.
What the court decided
SMITA Digitally signed by SMITA JOHNSON JOHNSON GONSALVESDate: 2024.12.03 GONSALVES 17:38:03 +0530
15.aba3060-24.docx
sg
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Anticipatory Bail Application No.3060 of 2024
Johan Constantine Barretto … Applicant
versus
Union of India And Anr. … Respondents
Mr Subodh Desai, i/b. Husayn Kopty, for the applicant. Ms Supriya Kak, APP, for the respondent/ State. Kishan Kumar, Preventive Officer, SPIB, Mumbai, Customs Zone-1, is present.
Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 3 December 2024.
P.C.:
. It is informed that the learned Counsel for the respondent Union is unable to attend the Court due to personal difficulty. The investigating officer present in the Court, on instructions, assures that the applicant will not be arrested in the present crime till the next date.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Johan Constantine Barretto
- respondent
Union of India
Coram
R.N. Laddha
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
All orders in this case
7 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court