JUDGMENT

Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Amol Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey learned counsel for D.R.I. and perused the record.

3. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Anil Soni in DRI Case Crime No. 02/2023, under Section 135 of Custom Act, 1962, Police Station D.R.I., District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the abovementioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while referring to the page 47 of the paper book submits that the applicant Anil Soni is a partner of R.A. Mosun Jewellers having its Head Office at Hasanpukur 1st Lane, Ground Floor, Kolkata, West Bengal, 700007 and its Branch office at Jaipur, Rajasthan and the gold which is shown to have been recovered from the possession of one Sumit Verma is actually owned by the firm of the applicant and he (Sumit Verma) was taking the gold from Kolkata to Jaipur under the directions of the applicant, with proper documentations.

5. It is also submitted, while referring to the tax invoices placed as Annexure No.1, as well as Debit Notes of date 24.1.2023 that the gold allegedly recovered and seized is owned by the firm of the applicant and was being transported to its branch office at Jaipur from Kolkata (head office).

6. It is also submitted that gold which has been recovered from the employee of the applicant, namely, Sumit Verma is shown to have been recovered while Sumit Verma was travelling by train at Kanpur Central Railway Station and he has not been arrested at any exit or entry point of territory of India.

7. It is further submitted that one of the partner of the firm, namely, M/s R.A. Mosun Jewellers, Mr. Ranjan Soni sent a representation dated 31.01.2023 to the Deputy Director of DRI, where he has admitted that the alleged gold confiscated and seized by the DRI belongs to the firm and he also produced all the receipts related to the said gold. He has also admitted that Sumit Verma was working for the firm and he was duly in possession of the title receipt of the gold, which was carried by him while travelling.

8. It is also submitted that for the purpose of demand of new designs of jewellery, the applicant's firm used to send the jewellery from Jaipur to Kolkata at its principal place of business for redesigning or melting the gold, so that it can be used again to form different kind of jewellery. The same was done under the proper guidelines and GST invoices/ tax invoices/ credit note, which was always sent with the transferred gold. The old gold was transferred in the form of jewellery with Sumit Verma from Jaipur to Kolkata. The true copy of GST invoices of jewellery sent from Jaipur to Kolkata is being annexed as Annexure No.6 to the affidavit.

9. It is further submitted that under proper documentation of title, the precious goods reached at the principal place of business by the firm, and it was melted into fine gold and carving of jewellery under the specified design as mandated in the State of Rajasthan. The said stock transfer was repatriated/ sales/ return/ stock transfer return to the Additional place of business at Jaipur under proper taxable invoice dated 26.01.2023 and the said document of title was duly possessed by the employee of the applicant, which has inadvertently masked by the DRI and the said gold was illegally branded as smuggled gold from Bangladesh.

10. While relying on a copy of circular no. No. 13/2022- Customs placed as Annexure No. 8 to the application, it is vehemently s