LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/hariyani-abbas-gulamhusen-vs-the-directorate-of-revenue-intelligence-thro-the-concerned-intelligence-20240129/ · Printed 18 Sep 2026
Criminal Reportable Judgment

Hariyani Abbas Gulamhusen vs The Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence Thro The Concerned Intelligence Officer

Court
Delhi High Court
Date
29 January 2024
Case No.
R/Criminal Misc. Application (For Anticipatory Bail) No. 21297 of 2023
Bench
Hon'ble Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi
Acts & Sections
CrPC §438 Customs Act, 1962 §111 Customs Act, 1962 §108 Customs Act, 1962 §135
Headnote AI-drafted · Editorially reviewed
The petitioner, a businessman from Gujarat, filed an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking anticipatory bail in connection with an inquiry initiated by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) relating to the smuggling of areca/beetle nuts under the guise of importing grinding wheels, in violation of Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962. Three containers were found to be carrying areca nuts instead of grinding wheels as declared in the Import General Manifest, leading to their confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act. The petitioner's name surfaced during the statement of one Mr. Satish Kumar T., who alleged receiving phone calls from one 'Mr. Abbas' inquiring about the consignment, and that 'Mr. Aakash'—alleged to be the same person as the petitioner—had provided credentials of M.S.K. Engineering Works for fraudulent importation.

The petitioner contended that apart from the statement of Mr. Satish Kumar T., there was no independent evidence linking him to the alleged offence, and that mere inquiry about a consignment could not establish criminal liability under Section 135 of the Customs Act. It was further argued that the petitioner had cooperated by supplying documents sought by the DRI and that no corroborative material existed to establish his role as the alleged kingpin. The DRI, on the other hand, argued that the petitioner had been evading summons issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act and that his custodial interrogation was necessary to unearth the conspiracy.

The High Court of Gujarat considered the nature of the allegations, the petitioner's antecedents, the stage of inquiry, and the need for custodial interrogation in light of the settled legal principles governing anticipatory bail, including the twin considerations of flight risk and likelihood of tampering with evidence, before proceeding to decide the application.
Catchwords: anticipatory bail Customs Act smuggling areca nuts beetle nuts Import General Manifest Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Section 438 CrPC Section 135 Customs Act Section 108 Customs Act Section 111 Customs Act custodial interrogation summons pre-arrest bail contraband

© LegalFirms.in — Headnote is proprietary. Raw judgment text is in the public domain per Section 52(1)(p) of the Copyright Act, 1957.

Full Judgment Text

[Cites 37, Cited by 0] Gujarat High Court Hariyani Abbas Gulamhusen vs The Directorate Of Revenue ... on 29 January, 2024 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.MA/21297/2023 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 29/01/2024 undefined IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL) NO. 21297 of 2023 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Sd./- ========================================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed YES to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? YES 3 Whether their L
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
From ₹167/month.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

More Delhi HC — Criminal

⚖ LegalFirms.in Directory
Find a verified advocate for this matter
Dealing with a similar case? Connect with a verified advocate on LegalFirms.in.
Find an Advocate →