Thakur Vinod Singh v. The Assistant Commissioner, (Legal and Prosecution), Customs Commissionerate, Hyderabad & Ors.

#2. Chintmani Dayasankar Mishra, aged 35 Years, Sib Shri Dayasankar Mishra, Shree Ram Villa, Azadnagar, Khemani, Ulhas Nagar-2, Thane, Maharashtra- 421002. ...RespondenUComplainant ...RespondenUAccused Petition under Section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant relief of return the FDR of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only), vide FDR No. 297751, Dt. 16.10.2018, to the Petitioner / Surety duly setting aside the order Dt. 12.02.2026 passed in Crl.MP. No. 21 of 2026 in C.C.No. 71 ot 2021 on the file of the Special Judge for Trial of Cases Under Economic Offences, at Hyderabad. This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri S LAKSHMI KANTH , Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri Dominic Fernandes, Senior Standing Counsel for Respondent No.1 and none appeared for the Respondent No.2. The Court made the following: ORDER IN THE HIGII COU RT FORTHE STATE OF TELANGAI\A AT HYDERABAD THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO CRIMINAL PETITION No.68 9O of2026 Date ;09.06.2026 Between: T'hakur Vinod Singh AND The Assistant Commissioner and another ...Petitioner .Respondents ORDER 'fhis Criminal I'etition is filed aggrieved by the order dated

12.02.2026 passed by the leamed Special Judge lor Trial of Cases under E,conomic Olfences, at Hyderabad in Crl'M'P No '21 of 2026 in C.C.No.7l ol 2021 where under the apptication fited by the petitioner seekine retum of suret) B.No'297751 lor Rs'2'00'000t- to him was dismissed.

#2. Hear<j Mr. S Manikanth. leamed counsel representing Mr.S.L.akshmikanth. leamecl counsel for the petitioner and Mr'Dominic Fernandes. learned Senior Standing Counsel fbr CBIC' appearing for rcspondent No.1 . 2 -

#3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that rcspondent No.2 was made a proforma party and no relief is sought against him. Hence, notice in respect of respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

#4. Leamed counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has fumished surety for Rs.2,00,000/- to respondent No.2/accused at the time of granting of bail in C.C. No.71 of 2021 on the file of the leamed Special Judge for Trial of Cases under Economic Offences, Hyderabad. Respondent No.2 was acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 132 and 135(1xii) of the Customs Act, 1962, after a full- fledged trial through the judgment dated 30.06.2025 in C.C. No.71 of

2021.In the said judgment, the learned Special Court has specifically held that the bail bonds of the accused shall stand cancelled after the appeal period is over and directed the accused to execute a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- under Section 43lA of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition invoking the provisions of Section 444 of Cr.P.C., seeking return of the surety B.No.297751 for Rs.2,00,000/- in his favour. The learned Special Court, without properly considering the averments made in support of the petition, dismissed the same only on the ground that respondent No.l had filed Crl.A.No.l382 of 2025 zrrd the same is pending. Pendency of the criminal appeal has nothing to do with the retum of the surety amount which was furnished by the petitioner while granting bail to respondent No.2 in C.C. No.7l of 2021. Unless the abovc said amount is returned to the petitioner, the petitioner rvill bc put to great hardship

#5. Leamcd Senior Standing Counsel lor CBIC has not disputed the submissions made bv the learned counsel for the petitioner. However, he subrrritted that. aggrieved by the judgment passed by the leamed Special Court in C.('.No.7l of 2021 dated 30.06.2025, respondent No.1 filed Crl.A.No.382 ol'2025, and the same is pending

#6. Har, ing considered the rival submissions made by the respective parties and afier perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner is not an accused in C.C. No.71 of 2021 and is only a suretl holder. I le furnished surety lor Rs.2.00,000/- at the time of granting o1'bail to respondent No.2. The learned Special Court, after a full-fledged tria I, acquitted respondent No.2 lor the offences under Sections 132 and 135(1)(ii) ol the Customs Act, 1962. The learned Special Cou( specificalll' held that the bail bonds of respondent No.2 shall stand cancelled after the appeal period is over and directed respondent No.l to execute a personal bond for Rs.10,000/- under Section 437-A ol' Cr.P.C

#7. I he rccord funher discloses that the petitioner filed Crl.M.P.No.l I of 2026 seeking to retum the surety b.No.297751 for Rs.2.00.000'- to him. The learned Special Court dismissed the 4 - application filed by the petitioner only on the ground that the prosecution has filed appeal vide Crl'A.no. 13 82 of 2025 and the same is pending.

#8. The mere pendency of the appeal does not impede the petitioner from seeking the return of the surety, which was given by the petitioner to respondent No.2 at the time of granting bail.

#9. During the course of hearing, leamed counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the judgment of the leamed Special Court dated 30.06.2025, respondent No.2/accused executed a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- in compliance with the provisions of Section 437 A of Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the surety amount rvas lying in C.C. No.71 of2021 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial ofCases under Economic Offences, at Hyderabad.

#10. Taking into consideration the above said facts, this Court is ofthe view that the petitioner is entitled to the retum of surety B.No.297751 for Rs.2,00,000/-.

#11. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order passed by the leamed Special Court in Crl.M.P. No.21 of 2026 in C.C. No.7l of 2021 dated 12.02.2026 is set aside. The learned Trial Court is directed to 5 return the surety 8.No.297751 for Rs.2,00,000/- in favour of the petitioner after obtaining the necessary authorisation from the petitioner.

#12. Accordingly'. the criminal petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// SD/- K.BHAVANI SWAMY ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, 'I . The Special Judge for Trial of Cases Under Economic Offences, at Hyderabad

#2. One CC to SRI S LAKSHMI KANTH Advocate IOPUC] 3. One CC to SRI DOMINIC FERNANDES (senior standing counsel for CBIC) loPUCl

#4. Two CD Copies ADK/KA 4b 1aE STA f6. 1+ '1-d 17JUN2tt26 F l)rc ,,: .:),' . i ,*/ .-'U HIGH COURT DATED: 09/06/2026 ORDER CRLP.No.6890 ot 2026 DISPOSING OF THE CRLP @ "f.\ Ier'