( 1 ) THE petitioner prays for pre-arrest bail under Section 438 read with Section 482 of the;code of criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the code" only) in a case being investigated by Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in connection with smuggling of huge quantities of fabrics resulting in large scale evasion of Customs Duty. have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

( 2 ) THE facts relevant for disposal of this application, briefly stated, are that on. 28. 8. 2000 one olga Kozireva, an Uzbek national was intercepted at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. It was found that she was carrying Chinese silk of the value of about Rs. 1. 56 crores. She intended to. smuggle it into India without paying Customs Duty, which was to the tune of about Rs. 50 lacs. when her application for bail came up before an Additional Sessions Judge, certain observations were made by the Court expressing doubts that she was indulging in smuggling activities in connivance with the customs officers as she was found to be visiting India quite frequently. On the basis of these observations and on the intervention of the Central Government, the matter was taken up by the respondent,. which is now inquiring into the role of the present petitioner in the transaction in question. The petitioner, an Afghan national is suspected to be aiding and assisting Olga Kozireva in the smuggling of chinese silk. It is alleged that on many occasions, he had gone to the Airport to receive the smuggled goods and then disposed of the same in the market. It is also suspected that he was in contact with many customs officers at or about the time of arrival of the smuggled goods and as such, the respondent has reasons to believe that there was a deep rooted conspiracy between foreign nationals, Indians and some customs officers in regard to smuggling of goods.

( 3 ) LEARNED counsel for the. petitioner has prayed for pre-arresst bail to the petitioner, mainly on the ground that petitioner is ready end willing to join investigations and in fact, he has even joined investigations after the interim protection granted by this Court. vide orders dated 21. 5. 2001. He, however, submits that the officers of the respondent are compelling the petitioner to make a statement under section 108 of the Customs Act on the dotted lines to which the petitioner is not agreeable. He also argues that CBI,. which is interrogating the petitioner in a connected matter, is satisfied with the revelations made by the petitioner, but the respondent is opposing his pre arrest bail for the reason that its officers want to compel him to make a statement the way they want. It is also submitted that wife and one daughter of the petitioner have already died and his other daughter is suffering from Thalsemia Major and in case the petitioner is not available to the child for looking after her, she may also die.

( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, argues that the allegations against the petitioner are serious and the respondent has sufficient material to show that he was taking an active part in smuggling activities in connection with which Olga Kozireva has been arrested. It is submitted that the petitioner is not cooperating in the investigations and on one pretext or the other he is avoiding to divulge complete information to the investigators. Learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and submits that in this case custodial interrogation of the petitioner is essential to detect all the ramifications of the crime and find out as to how many others and in what manner were involved in smuggling racket.

( 5 ) BEFORE adverting to the facts of this case, this Court must focus its attention to the principles and parameters governing the grant of pre-arrest bail orders under Section 438 of the Code. In Gurbaksh singh Sibbia Vs. State of Punjab. 1980 (2) SCC 565, the a