SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Ker) 193

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A.BADHARUDEEN, J.
Sathyamendra Singh, Sathyamendra Singh – Petitioner 
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation (CBI), Represented By Special Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Crl.MC No. 10498 of 2025, Crl.REV. Pet No. 76 of 2026
Decided On : 11-02-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Shri. K. Aravind Menon, Sri. P. Vijaya Bhanu (Sr.), Sri. P.M. Rafiq, Sri. M. Revikrishnan, Sri. Ajeesh K. Sasi, Sruthy N. Bhat, Smt. Sruthy K.K., Smt. Nanditha S., Shri. Aaron Zacharias Benny.
For the Respondent: Shri. Sreelal N. Warrier, Spl.Public, Prosecutor, Central Bureau of Investigation (Cbi).

A discharge petition is only granted if no prima facie evidence exists to support the charges; involvement is determined by the prosecution's presented evidence.

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code - Sections 120B and 409 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Sections 7, 8 and 12 - Charges against Customs officials for facilitating smuggling of contraband items through corrupt practices - The petitioner's involvement was supported by multiple eyewitness accounts and CCTV evidence demonstrating illegal activities, negating the claim for discharge. (Paras 4, 5, 9, 15)

(B) Discharge Petition - Legal principles regarding discharge petitions assert that if the prosecution presents prima facie evidence indicating involvement in a crime, discharge cannot be granted. (Para 13)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Customs Superintendent, was charged with conspiracy and corruption related to the import of contraband cigarettes. The CBI conducted a surprise check leading to allegations of collusion among Customs officials to facilitate smuggling.

Findings of Court:
The court found sufficient prima facie evidence of the petitioner's involvement in the offense based on witness statements and CCTV footage.

Issues: The core issue was whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to warrant the continuation of proceedings against the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that a discharge petition will be denied if there is prima facie evidence suggesting involvement in the crime, thereby maintaining the integrity of ongoing investigations.

Result: Petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. case initiation and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2)
2. prosecution allegations of corruption. (Para 4 , 5)
3. charges against the petitioner outlined. (Para 7)
4. defense arguments against discharge. (Para 8 , 9)
5. witness statements and cctv evidence. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
6. criteria for discharging an accused. (Para 13 , 14)
7. conclusion and dismissal of petitions. (Para 15)

ORDER :

A.BADHARUDEEN, J.

[Crl.MC No.10498/2025 & Crl.R.P.No.76/2026]

Sathyamendra Singh, who is the 4th accused in C.C.No.1 of 2023, arising out of Crime No.2 of 2021 of Central Bureau of Investigation (for short 'CBI'), Kochi, has filed Crl.M.C.No.10498 of 2025 and the prayers herein as under :

“For these and other grounds which may be urged at the time of hearing it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this Criminal Miscellaneous Case, and quash Annexure 2 Chargesheet and all further proceedings in CC No.1/2023 of the court of Special Judge for CBI III, Ernakulam, as against the petitioner/accused no.4, so as to secure the ends of justice.”

2. The same petitioner has filed Crl.R.P.No.76 of 2026 challenging order dated 31.12.2025 in C.C.No.1 of 2023, whereby the discharge plea raised by him before the Special Court was dismissed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the CBI. Perused the records.

4. This is a case charge sheeted by the Inspector of Police, CBI/SPE/ACB, Cochin against the accused, thirty in numbers, alleging commission offence punishable under Section 120B read with Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC' hereinafter) and Sections 7 , 8 and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the PC Act') in Crime No.RC 2(A)/2021/CBI/ACB/Cochin.

5. Precisely, the prosecution allegation is that a joint surprise check was conducted by the officials of CBI and Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Cochin at the Calicut International Airport, on the basis of an information alleging rampant corruption by Customs Officials of Calicut International Airport at Karippur from 3.30 a.m. on 12.01.2021 to 5.00 a.m. on 13.01.2021. The accused Nos.1 to 12 and one Ramendra Singh were the Customs Officials, on duty at the airport, as Batch 'B' officials. Accused No.13 was the sub staff on duty to assist the aforesaid officials. The joint surprise check revealed the role of aforesaid customs officials in fraudulently facilitating the import of prohibited/contraband items for trade, by releasing the same without assessing/valuing or undervaluing the goods by obtaining undue advantage from the passengers. The accused Nos. 14 to 30 and the Approvers/CWs. 29 and 31 to 35 (accused Nos. 22, 25, 28, 29, 36 and 37 during the stage of investigation) are the passengers arrived at the Calicut International Airport from abroad, who were permitted to leave the airport with prohibited/contraband items, after receiving illegal gratification from them. A detailed proceedings regarding the joint surprise check was prepared by the officials of CBI and DRI. Annexure Nos.I to VI shown in the said proceedings are regarding the contraband goods recovered from passengers on 12.01.2021, unaccounted contraband items found near baggage counter at customs arrival hall of the Calicut International Airport, unaccounted articles at the baggage counter, unaccounted cash in the customs area, unaccounted contraband items found in Customs Office Hall of Calicut International Airport and the list of documents seized during the said proceedings.

7. Charge No.72 in the final report, which is pertaining to the petitioner, reads as under;

“A-4 Shri. Sathyamendra Singh, while functioning as Customs Superintendent, Calicut International Airport, Karippur, who is authorised to take steps for collection of Customs Duty, imposing Customs Duty on goods detected in re-examination, detection of contraband goods illegally imported on which Shri.Sathyamendra S

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top