Department of Central Excise (H. O. ) Bombay & another vs Rajesh Tulsidas Vedant & others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1988 Supreme(Bom) 359

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
H.H. Kantharia, J.
Department of Central Excise (H.O.)
Bombay another .... Orig. complainants.
Versus
Rajesh Tulsidas Vedant others .... Respondents.
Suo Motu Petition No. 1 of 1988 in Criminal Application No. 1917 of 1988, decided on 18-10-1988.
Advocates appeared :
M.K. Patwardhan, S.P.P., for Central Excise Department.
Mrs. Manjula Rao, A.P.P., for State.
V.C. Gupte, for respondent No. 1.
Miss Rekha P. Safari, for respondent Nos. 2, 3 4.

Headnote:Sections 434 (4), 482; Constitution of India, Article 227-Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Section 27-Serious offence under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act affecting life and health of lakhs of people-Bail-Grant of in such offence-High Court can exercise inherent powers to suo motu conceal bail granted in undeserving case.
       A case of conspiracy he should have realised, is difficult to investigate and unearth. The investigating agency is entitled to adequate time for that.
       Moreover, one should not be oblivious of the menace of drug traflicking. Its disestrous consequences are difficult to be described in words. In a grave offence like this, a Magistrate should think twice before granting bail. One should bear in mind that these offences are of very grave type where the minimum may extended to 20 years with a fine of rupees two lakhs and for special reasons even more than two lakhs. Although the accused persons for this sort of an offence cannot be visited with a penalty of death sentence or imprisonment for life, that such offences are not less serious than those punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
       The instant case does not merely involve an economic offence but worse than that being an offence against humanity. Such offences adversely affect the national and international health. Apart from unfortunate victims of drug addiction, innocent children in thousands and, perhaps in lakhs in the world may ruin their lives by consuming drug like brown sugar and therefore, anyone who indluges in such heinous crime has to be dealt with a very heavy hand if humanity is to be serve. In this case, there is a well founded apprehension that if put on bail the present accused persons may indulge in similar offences or may abscond any may not be available for trial.
       The suo motu action, succeeds and the bail orders passed in favour of the four accused persons by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate are cancelled in accordance with the provisions at sub-section (2) of Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the interest of justice and for the greater good of the larger number of people.
       Section 27
       See Criminal Procedure Code, Sections 434 (4), 482.

JUDGMENT - H.H. KATNHARIA, J.:---This is a suo motu proceeding initiated by this Court, in exercise of its inherent powers under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the supervisory writ jurisdiction vested in it under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, for cancellation of bail order passed in favour of the respondents by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bombay.

2. The tale telling facts giving rise to the suo motu action are as under:

On 10th August, 1988, the officers of the Central Excise, on a secret information, kept a secret vigil over the entrance No. 2-B of the departure hall of the New International Passengers Terminus, Sahar. At about 21-45 Hrs., they accosted respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (hereinafter referred to as Rajesh, Atul and Pradeep' respectively). The trial of investigation that commenced thereafter led to startling discoveries. It was revealed that Rajesh was a passenger leaving India for Brussels. He had an air-ticket for a journey between Bombay-Brussels-Bombay. He admitted being in possession of brown sugar. Atul and Pradeep admitted that they had accompanied Rajesh to see him off 'safely'. Rajesh, Atul and Pradeep, along with the luggage of Rajesh, were taken to the office of the Central Excise Department at Piramal Chambers, Lalbaug, Parel, Bombay 400 012 duly accompanied by panch-witnesses. There, brown sugar weighing 1110 gms. Valued at Rs. 2,20,000/- concealed under cashew nuts in tins was recovered from Rajesh's baggage. In the follow up action, respondent No. 4 (hereinafter referred to as 'Kirti'.) who is brother of Atul was traced at Glamour Guest House, Kandivli, Bombay. A search of the said flat resulted into recovery of brown sugar weighing 1450 gms. Valued at Rs. 2,90,000/-. The same was seized. Packing materials, weighing machine and electrically operated press for sealing tins etc., were also found in the flat and seized.

3. Rajesh, Atul, Pradeep and Kirti were put under arrest at about 10.30 hrs. on 12th August, 1988 for commission of alleged offences punishable under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. They were produced before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Esplanade, Bombay, on the same day at about 13.40 hrs. along with a remand application bearing No. 685 of 1988 and their custody was asked for. They were remanded to custody till 26th August, 1988.

4. On 26th August, 1988, the same Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate extended the remand period upto 9th September, 1988 on the report and at the request of the Central Excise Department.

5. In the meanwhile, on 31st August, 1988 when the concerned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was on leave, an interim application for bail was made on behalf of Atul, Pradeep and Kirti in the Court of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate who issued notice to the Central Excise Department, returnable on 2nd September, 1988. It appears that the bail application was opposed on behalf of Central Excise Department but the Magistrate released Atul, Pradeep and Kirti on bail in sum of rupees two lakhs each with one surety in the like amount or cash deposit of the same amount.

6. Rajesh was produced before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on 9th September, 1988, the usual day on remand, when he was also released on bail in sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with one surety in the like amount or a cash deposit of Rs. 1,25,000/-.

7. On 5th September, 1988 one Mukesh Chhotalal Shah made an application in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate that he be accepted as surety in sum of rupees six lakhs for Atul, Pradeep and Kirit. The Magistrate accepted him as surety for Atul and Kirit only by his order dated 21st September, 1988.

8. Feeling aggrieved that the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate did not accept his as surety for Pradeep Mukesh Shah filed Criminal Application No. 1917 of 1988 in this Central Ex

Click Here to Read the rest of this document