Mohammed Saif Uddin Qureshi vs. The Superintendent Of Customs, (Preventive) Customs Commissionerate

Facts

The petitioner, Mohammed Saif Uddin Qureshi, filed a criminal petition under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. seeking bail. He is the sole accused in HQPOR No. 91 of 2022-Customs (Preventive), registered by the Superintendent of Customs (Preventive), Customs Commissionerate, Hyderabad. The petitioner was apprehended at Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, Hyderabad, upon arrival on aircraft DK524. Customs officers, acting on specific information about the petitioner attempting to smuggle gold of foreign origin, examined passengers. The petitioner declined a personal search but was subsequently searched. Officers discovered gold in paste form concealed within multiple layers of his underwear. This paste was processed, yielding a metal bar weighing 2694 grams, valued at Rs. 1,39,81,860/-. The petitioner has been in judicial custody since November 25, 2022.

Held

The Court held that the petitioner is not entitled to bail at this stage. The Court found the case projected by the prosecution to be grave in nature. The reasoning was based on the substantial quantity and value of gold (2694 grams worth Rs. 1,39,81,860/-) found in the petitioner's possession, concealed in a manner indicating an attempt to smuggle foreign origin gold in violation of the Customs Act. The Court noted that the investigation is ongoing, as submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for Customs. Therefore, the grounds presented by the petitioner for enlargement on bail were not validated by the Court at this preliminary stage. The Court dismissed the criminal petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail pending investigation, inquiry, and trial in HQPOR No. 91 of 2022-Customs (Preventive) under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.? The petitioner argued that he merely accepted baggage to carry due to sponsorship from some individuals and has not committed any offense. He also highlighted that he has been in judicial custody since November 25, 2022, and therefore, should be enlarged on bail. The respondent (Revenue) contended that the petitioner was found in possession of 2694 grams of gold worth Rs. 1,39,81,860/-. They further submitted that the case is still under investigation. The respondent relied on the facts presented in the remand report, detailing the apprehension and recovery of smuggled gold.