Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Bail granted to 9 persons arrested along with 83 kg of gold-Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court has ruled that under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, simple gold smuggling that does not threaten India's economic security or monetary stability is not a terrorist act (UAPA).

Therefore, a Division Bench of Justices Mukta Gupta and Mini Pushkarna granted bail to nine men accused of involvement in the smuggling of 83.6Kg of gold seized at New Delhi Railway Station in 2020.

"...possession, use, production, and transfer of counterfeit currency or coin are per se illegal and constitute an offence, whereas production, possession, use, etc. of 'gold' are not per se illegal or a crime... Thus, gold smuggling that poses no threat to India's economic security or monetary stability cannot be considered a terrorist act "the Court stated in its verdict.

The High Court was hearing the bail appeal of nine men arrested by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) in August 2020 for possessing more than 500 gold biscuits (83.6Kg). They were travelling on the Dibrugarh-New Delhi Rajdhani Express with fraudulent identification.

While eight of them — Raikiran Balaso Gaikwad, Saddam Ramjan Patel, Dileep Laxman Patil, Pawan Kumar Mohan Gaikwad, Avahut Arun Vibhute, Sachin Appaso Hasbe, Abhijeet Nand Kumar Babar, and Yogesh Hanmant Rupnar — were taken into custody on the spot by the DRI, the ninth — Vaibhav Sampat More

Later, the National Investigation Agency (NIA) took over the investigation and charged the defendants with violations of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). In May 2021, their bail was denied by the lower court, which was a special court.

The appeals argued that the prosecution had no evidence against them other than statements made under Section 108 of the Customs Act, which are inadmissible and cannot be considered in a trial under the UAPA.

Counsel argued that there was no evidence in the record indicating that the gold was obtained from a foreign source.

Additional Solicitor General (ASG) SV Raju, appearing on behalf of the NIA, referred to the Statement of Objects and Reasons for amending Section 15 of the UAPA by introducing Section 15(1)(a) (iiia).

According to him, the amendment was prompted by the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). In the FATF's report, it was clearly stated that gold is a universally accepted currency that can be traded anonymously, and that such transactions would pose a grave threat to the country's economic security.

In light of the gravity of the offence, he argued that bail should not be granted to the appellants because they engaged in a larger conspiracy to commit a terrorist act by disrupting the country's economic stability.

In the present case, however, no death has been caused, so Clause 'b' of Section 16 of the UAPA, which provides for a minimum sentence of five years' imprisonment that may be extended to life imprisonment, will not apply.

It therefore granted bail to all of the defendants on the condition that they post a 1 lakh personal bond and surety. In addition, they were ordered to submit their passports to the trial court and refrain from leaving the country without prior authorization.

The appellants were represented by senior advocates Saurabh Kirpal and Mohit Mathur, as well as advocates Somesh Tiwari, Kartika Sharma, Chirag Madan, Kaveesh Nair, Rahul Raheja, Gaurav Prakash, Rohit Raheja, Supriya Shekhar, Tarun Khanna, and Vinayan Chithale.

The NIA was represented by ASG SV Raju, SPP Rahul Tyagi, and attorneys Aashish Chojar, Deepak Malik, Anshuman Singh, Ankit Bhatia, and Harsh Paul Singh.

D.D:-03 JUNE,2022

 

VAIBHAV SAMPAT MORE  versus NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY THROUGH ITS CHIEF INVESTIGATION OFFICER

Latest Legal News