High Court

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned Counsel for the DRI as well as perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in D.R.I. Case No. 27 of 2023, under Sections 135(1)(b)/135(1)(i) of Customs Act, Police Station D.R.I., District Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 31.05.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary.

2. Heard Shri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel representing the Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence and perused the record.

3. The instant application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Shubham Soni, in D.R.I. Case No. 27 of 2023, under Section 135(1)(b)/135(1)(i) Customs Act, Police Station D.R.I., District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the complaint has been filed by the D.R.I. before the appropriate court and during the course of investigation of the matter the applicant was not arrested by the D.R.I. and the complicity of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Gopi Krishna Soni only to the extent that the applicant was/is the owner of the Hyunadai Venue car bearing registration no. UP 32 MA 3297 wherein the 'gold' was being allegedly smuggled.

5. It is further submitted that the story of the prosecution is in terms that the officers of the D.R.I. had intercepted two persons, namely, Mahesh Kumar Soni and Gopi Krishna Soni from the Lucknow Charbagh Railway Station on 12.12.2023 and on being interrogated, they informed that another person in the name of Diler Abbas is travelling to Mumbai with one Mahesh Kumar Soni. After arrival of Diler Abbas, who is stated to be the driver of Mahesh Kumar Soni, one Rehan was called and all these three persons were taken to D.R.I. Office, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and from their search 5541 grams of 'foreign origin gold and jewellery' was recovered along with a cash of Rs. 68,80,000/- which was accordingly seized.

6. It is vehemently submitted that having regard to the statements given by the persons who have been apprehended under Section 108 of the Act, it was stated that gold was given to Mahesh Kumar Soni and Diler Abbas by co-accused Gopi Krishna Soni for delivering it in Mumbai to the co-accused Shyam Soni, who is having a shop in the name of G.S. Gold and during the inspection, the said shop was found locked and it was revealed that the same is rarely open and thereafter the complaint has been filed.

7. It is further submitted that almost all the co-accused persons of this crime, namely, Gopi Krishna Soni, who has admitted in categorical terms to be the owner of the gold as well as Diler Abbas and Mahesh Kumar Soni, who were carriers and Shyam Soni have been granted regular bail and anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by this Court, vide orders dated 22.12.2023, 02.02.2024, 22.02.2024 and 14.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15287 of 2023, 1235 of 2024, 1999 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 544 of 2024, respectively.

8. Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel representing the D.R.I. submits that he be granted sometime for the purpose of filing counter affidavit/objections, but he could not refute that during the course of investigation that D.R.I. has not arrested the applicant and his role is much lesser lesser than those who have already been granted regular bail by this Court.

9. Keeping in view the fact that the complaint has already been filed by the D.R.I. and during the course of investigation the applicant has not been arrested and the other co-accused persons of the crime including the owner and the carriers of the gold have been granted regular bail by this Court and primafacie the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not warranted, the applicant may be granted interim from arrest.

10. Thus, list this case on 20.06.2024, by which date, learned counsel appearing for the D.R.I. may file counter affidavit/objections.

11. It is provided that till the next date of listing, the applicant- Shubham Soni, in the event of arrest of the applicant under any process of the trial court or on his appearance before the trial court till 20.06.2024, whichever is earlier, the applicant shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Investigating Officer/Trial Court with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (2) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court." From perusal of the order dated 31.05.2024, it transpires that learned counsel for the DRI has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which is pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the DRI has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Shubham Soni till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 kkv/

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned Counsel for the DRI as well as perused the material placed on record. Instant application has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail in D.R.I. Case No. 27 of 2023, under Sections 135(1)(b)/135(1)(i) of Customs Act, Police Station D.R.I., District Lucknow. From perusal of the order sheet, it appears that on 31.05.2024, the following order was passed wherein the present applicant has been granted interim anticipatory bail:- "1. Learned A.G.A. informs that he has procured complete instructions in the matter including up-to-date case diary.

2. Heard Shri Atul Verma, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel representing the Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence and perused the record.

3. The instant application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Shubham Soni, in D.R.I. Case No. 27 of 2023, under Section 135(1)(b)/135(1)(i) Customs Act, Police Station D.R.I., District Lucknow, with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail, as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant while pressing the anticipatory bail application submits that the complaint has been filed by the D.R.I. before the appropriate court and during the course of investigation of the matter the applicant was not arrested by the D.R.I. and the complicity of the applicant has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused Gopi Krishna Soni only to the extent that the applicant was/is the owner of the Hyunadai Venue car bearing registration no. UP 32 MA 3297 wherein the 'gold' was being allegedly smuggled.

5. It is further submitted that the story of the prosecution is in terms that the officers of the D.R.I. had intercepted two persons, namely, Mahesh Kumar Soni and Gopi Krishna Soni from the Lucknow Charbagh Railway Station on 12.12.2023 and on being interrogated, they informed that another person in the name of Diler Abbas is travelling to Mumbai with one Mahesh Kumar Soni. After arrival of Diler Abbas, who is stated to be the driver of Mahesh Kumar Soni, one Rehan was called and all these three persons were taken to D.R.I. Office, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow and from their search 5541 grams of 'foreign origin gold and jewellery' was recovered along with a cash of Rs. 68,80,000/- which was accordingly seized.

6. It is vehemently submitted that having regard to the statements given by the persons who have been apprehended under Section 108 of the Act, it was stated that gold was given to Mahesh Kumar Soni and Diler Abbas by co-accused Gopi Krishna Soni for delivering it in Mumbai to the co-accused Shyam Soni, who is having a shop in the name of G.S. Gold and during the inspection, the said shop was found locked and it was revealed that the same is rarely open and thereafter the complaint has been filed.

7. It is further submitted that almost all the co-accused persons of this crime, namely, Gopi Krishna Soni, who has admitted in categorical terms to be the owner of the gold as well as Diler Abbas and Mahesh Kumar Soni, who were carriers and Shyam Soni have been granted regular bail and anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court as well as by this Court, vide orders dated 22.12.2023, 02.02.2024, 22.02.2024 and 14.03.2024 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 15287 of 2023, 1235 of 2024, 1999 of 2024 and Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 544 of 2024, respectively.

8. Shri Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel representing the D.R.I. submits that he be granted sometime for the purpose of filing counter affidavit/objections, but he could not refute that during the course of investigation that D.R.I. has not arrested the applicant and his role is much lesser lesser than those who have already been granted regular bail by this Court.

9. Keeping in view the fact that the complaint has already been filed by the D.R.I. and during the course of investigation the applicant has not been arrested and the other co-accused persons of the crime including the owner and the carriers of the gold have been granted regular bail by this Court and primafacie the custodial interrogation of the applicant is not warranted, the applicant may be granted interim from arrest.

10. Thus, list this case on 20.06.2024, by which date, learned counsel appearing for the D.R.I. may file counter affidavit/objections.

11. It is provided that till the next date of listing, the applicant- Shubham Soni, in the event of arrest of the applicant under any process of the trial court or on his appearance before the trial court till 20.06.2024, whichever is earlier, the applicant shall be released forthwith on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/Investigating Officer/Trial Court with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required; (2) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court." From perusal of the order dated 31.05.2024, it transpires that learned counsel for the DRI has failed to demonstrate that there is any adversarial fact which is pleaded in the bail application. This Court finds that the applicant was enlarged on an interim anticipatory bail after thoroughly considering the merits of the case. The learned counsel for the DRI has also failed to submit any fact that the applicant is not cooperating with the investigation proceeding or otherwise any glaring fact which can adversely affect the merit of the case. In view of the aforesaid, the present anticipatory bail application is hereby allowed while extending anticipatory bail to the applicant, namely, Shubham Soni till disposal of the trial subject to the following conditions:- (i) that the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required; (ii) that the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence; (iii) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court; (iv) that the applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted; and (v) that the applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness. In case of default, it would be open for the Investigating Agency to move application for vacation of this interim protection. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 kkv/