Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
Pulikkippoyil Sharafudheen – Appellant
Versus
Superintendent of Customs (Aiu), Air Customs Calicut International Airport Represented By Its Standing Counsel – Respondent
ORDER :
Petitioners are husband and wife. They face an indictment for the offence under section 135 of the Customs Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act') alleging import of gold, the market price of which exceeds Rupees One Crore. They were taken into custody on 18.05.2023 and hence seek enlargement on bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Code').
2. Information was received by the Air Intelligence Unit of the Air Customs, International Airport, Calicut, that one Amjad Mihran was indulging in smuggling of gold into India using carriers, including family members. A strict vigil was therefore maintained over the passengers. Based on the intelligence input, petitioners, who were travelling from Dubai to Calicut by Spicejet Flight SG 54, were intercepted at the exit gate of the baggage hall at Calicut Airport on 16-05-2023. As mentioned earlier, they are husband and wife. Upon a thorough personal search, the Customs Officers seized 950 gms of gold in a compound form concealed in four capsules in the rectum of the first petitioner and a further 1198 gms of gold concealed in a compound form inside the panties worn by the second petitioner. The total quant
Section 135 of Customs Act, 1952 reads as evasion of duty or prohibitions.
The court held that the offence under the Customs Act is bailable as the value of gold in individual possession is below Rs. 1 Crore, classifying the goods as restricted rather than prohibited.
The court held that the offence under Section 135 of the Customs Act is bailable when the value of the goods is below Rs. 1 Crore and classified as restricted rather than prohibited.
The court ruled that the statutory provisions under the Customs Act render the offence non-bailable due to the substantial value of contraband, emphasizing public interest and evidence integrity.
Smuggling of gold, even with intent to threaten economic security, does not constitute a terrorist act under Section 15(1)(a)(iiia) of the UA(P)A.
The court's decision emphasized the exercise of discretion in granting bail, considering the nature of the allegations and the lack of recovery or discovery at the instance of the applicant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the illegal diversion of duty-free imported gold to the domestic market and mis-declaration of exported jewelry are serious offenses that can ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
