The petitioner sought anticipatory bail alleging false implication in a case of smuggling diamonds. The court noted the recovery of significant quantity of diamonds and the gravity of the offence, holding that securing the petitioner was necessary for investigation and risk of tampering existed. The petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRL.O.P.No.11463 of 2024
CRL.O.P.No.11463 of 2024
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
The petitioner, who apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 104(6) of Customs Act, 1962 read with 135(1)(b) and 135(1)(c) of the Customs Act, 1962, in F.No.DRI/CZU/VIII/48/ENQ-01/INT-07/2024, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.
2.The case of the prosecution is that petitioner was illegally smuggling diamond. Hence the case.
3 . The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner only transferred ticket to A-1 except that he has no specific role with the other accused for smuggling diamonds. He further submits that a false case has been foisted against him and that accused named Jawid Ahamed 161 statement was only about the Prasanth and thereafter the respondent police for statistical purpose made the petitioner as an accused and there was no smuggling goods or nothing incrimination has been recovered from the petitioner herein. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail.
1/4
CRL.O.P.No.11463 of 2024
4.The learned Special Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) submitted that
based on the inteligence, the officers of DRI-CZU under Mahazar proceedings dated 06/07-02-2024 examined the checked-in baggage of the passenger Mr.Jawid Ahamed Kadhar Mohideen and recovered 8 zip-lock pouches which appeared to contain precious stones / /diamonds. The said pouches were detained and further examined and assayed by M/s Madras Gem Institute, a Central Government Approved Valuer, who certified that the pouches contained 1003.99 carats of diamonds valued at Rs 2,33,08,595/-. On demand by the officers, Mr.Jawid Ahamed Kadhar Mohideen could not produce any documents to prove the licit acquisition, purchase for the export of the said diamonds and informed that he is not the owner of the goods and was carrying them based on the instructions of Mr.Prashand and Mr. Salman in exchange of monetary consideration.
4.1. The learned counsel further submitted that the subject 1003.99
carats of diamonds valued at Rs 2,33,08,595/- were attempted to be smuggled out of the country by Mr. Jawid Ahamed Kadhar Mohideen in a concealed manner without proper documents and any other form of declaration to the Customs as required under Baggage Rules. Foreign Trade Policy and that the said act or
2/4
CRL.O.P.No.11463 of 2024
omission amounts to smuggling in terms of the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and therefore the said goods which are in commercial quantity could not be considered at bonalide baggage as per the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. Further, non-declaration of the said.commercial quantity of diamonds is in violation of Baggage Rules, 2016 read with the Customs Act, 1962 and thereby amounting to smuggling and therefore liable to confiscation in terms of Section 113 (e). 113 (h) and 113 (i) of the Custorms Act, 1962 owing to improper exportation. Accordingly, the subject goods were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act.
4.2. The learned Special Public Prosecutor further submitted that Mr.Jawid Ahamed Kadhar Mohideen vide his voluntary statement dated 07.02.2024 interalia stated that the baggage containing concealed commercial quantity of diamonds was handed over to him by Mr Prashand with instruction to carry them to Bangkok. He further stated that the travel tickets were sent to him by Mr.Salamn through whatsapp on 06.02.2024. Mr.Jawid Ahamed Kadhar Mohideen was placed under arrest on 07.02.2024 under Section 104 of the Customs Act,1962. Hence, he strongly opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
3/4
CRL.O.P.No.11463 of 2024
T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.
dsn
Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) and perused the materials placed on records.
this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
25.06.2024
dsn
CRL.O.P.No.11463 of 2024
4/4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case involving smuggling of commercial quantity of diamonds?
4 provisions across 1 enactments
T.V. Thamilselvi
Respondent Police
T.V. Thamilselvi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
