Mohammad Rafiq, J.

This habeas corpus petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Arpit Jain with the prayer that respondent Union of India be directed by issuance of writ of habeas corpus to release him from illegal detention and custody on such terms and conditions as may be deemed just and proper in respect of Case No.F.No.VIII(48)AP/12/2017 registered by the Customs Department, Jaipur, pertaining to Criminal Complaint No.48/2017 pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences), Jaipur Metropolitan, in which cognizance has been taken vide order dated 15.01.2018.

2. Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora, learned counsel for petitioner, submitted that the petitioner is in jail in a matter where cognizance against him has been taken for bailable offences under Sections 132 and 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short, ‘the Act of 1962’). The cognizance has been taken by the court only for bailable offence. Section 132 of the Act of 1962 provides for punishment, which may extend to two years and that is a bailable offence. So far as Section 135 of the Act of 1962 is concerned, the penalty provided therein is depended on the value of the goods and the tax evaded, which would determine whether it is bailable or not. If the market value of the goods exceeds one crore of rupees or the duty evaded or attempted to be evaded exceeds fifty lakhs rupees, it is non-bailable otherwise it is bailable.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner argued that the petitioner was allegedly taken into custody by the Customs Department at Jaipur Airport at around 3:30 AM on 12.11.2017. He was not immediately presented before the Court of the concerned Magistrate. However, on 13.11.2017 at 2:00 pm the petitioner was presented by one Mr. Prem Raj Jogwal, Inspector (Customs) Airport Jaipur, before the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Jaipur Metropolitan, who remanded the petitioner in judicial custody. While the petitioner was in custody on 12.11.2017, he was beaten and subjected to assault. His statement was recorded under Section 108 of the Act of 1962 under duress and coercion. The petitioner, by way of an application, pointed out this to the Magistrate concerned and also submitted that his signatures have been obtained on blank and typed written pages and that his mother and brother have also been threatened. The medical examination of the petitioner indicated that there was abrasion on his right knee. The petitioner moved a bail application before this Court while the investigation was pending. This Court, by order dated 18.12.2017, dismissed the bail application. After completion of investigation, a complaint was filed in the competent court on 15.01.2018. The allegations made against the petitioner therein is to the effect that the petitioner was carrying foreign currency notes equivalent of the value of INR 96,24,012/- and Indian Currency Notes of the value of Rs.26,400/-, without any approval or permission from the Reserve Bank of India as per the provisions of Section 3 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (for short, ‘the Act of 1999’) read with Regulations 3, 5 and 7 of the Foreign Exchange Management (Export and Import of Currency) Regulations, 2015 (for short, ‘the Regulations of 2015’). Two cellphones were recovered from the petitioner, out of which one cellphone model Samsung Galaxy Note-3, allegedly carried pictures of calculation sheets of foreign currency. The Customs Department, based on these calculation-sheets, allegedly concluded that those pertained to foreign currency that were carried abroad earlier from foreign currency that were carried abroad earlier from India and amounted to Rs.5,89,35,511.03 and therefore maintained that the value of currency notes, after clubbing previous transactions, was over Rs.1 crore, and therefore the offence was bailable.

4. It is submitted that so-called slips found in the digital form in the mobile of the petitioner and recovery thereof are all co