Back
MOHD. FAIZ ALAM KHAN
Mohammad Imran – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri. Manish Misra, learned counsel appearing for Union of India and perused the record.
2. The present application has been moved by the accused applicant-Mohammad Imran in D.R.I. Case No. 21/2023-24, under section 135 of the Customs Act, Police Station-Custom Airport, District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as she is apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication and nothing as claimed by the prosecution has been recovered from the possession of the applicant.
4. It is vehemently submitted that on 3.8.2023, the applicant had gone to Dubai to meet a person namely, Rahul @ Bengali and as the applicant had gone to search any work for him and the same was not made available to him, the aforesaid Rahul @ Bengali told him that there is no possibility of getting any work and he may go back to India and he also purchased a return ticket of the applicant on 13.8.2023 and also gave him a black colour trolley suitcase informing him that it contains some old articles and the same would be given to
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 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 cumulative value of goods smuggled may be considered for identifying the seriousness of the offence under the Customs Act when multiple individuals act in concert.
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.
Section 135 of Customs Act, 1952 reads as evasion of duty or prohibitions.
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.
Legal importation of gold requires compliance with customs duty and declaration; failure to declare renders goods liable for confiscation, but redemption options exist under the Act.
Possession of unaccounted foreign gold bars leads to conviction under Customs and Gold Control Acts, where failure to provide lawful explanation substantiates charges of smuggling.
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
