Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Bail Application No. 13 of 1979, decided on 16th June, 1979..
---S. 497‑Petitioner, an air passenger in transit to another country accused of offence of smuggling contraband goods‑Bail pressed on grounds : (i) charge of smu ggling not substantiated in view of defini tion of smuggling under S. 2 (s), Customs Act, 1969; (ii) petitioner a jeweller by profession taking jewellery studded with precious .stones to customers in a foreign country to compliance of their orders ; (iii) petitioner having no visa to land in Pakistan and only landing to catch direct flight to a foreign country‑Legal points being involved, and requiring further inquiry to determine responsibility of petitioner for committing alleged offence of smuggling, bail allowed‑Customs Act (1 V of 1969), S. 2 (s).
G. H. Abbasi with Raja Qureshi and Mustafa Chandu for Applicant.
Mrs Rashida Patel, Special Counsel for the State.
The admitted position is that the applicant is an Indian National. He was travelling by Lutfthansa Air Lines from Hong Kong to Kuwait on 29th May, 1979 and was a passenger in transit. Since there was no direct flight of Lufthansa Air Lines from Hong Kong to Kuwait, he had got down at Karachi to catch another fight by Kuwait Air Lines and he had such a confirmed seat, which document has been produced by the learned counsel for the State, as .such a slip is affixed to the ticket itself. He was arrested on the same day (29th May, 1979) at the Karachi Air Port, on the charge of smuggling the contraband goods (gold ornaments studded with precious stones). The alleged offended goods had been seized and arc stated to be approximately valued at Rs. 3.00,000 (Rupees thirty lacy only).
The learned counsel Mr. Abbasi has contended that the charge of smuggling cannot be substantiated in view of the definition of smuggling under section 2 (a) of the Pakistan Customs Act. He has further contend ed that the applicant is a Jeweller by profession and had received an order, in compliance whereof, he was taking the jewellery, studded with precious stones and was taking it to Kuwait, for handing it over to the customers. He had further argued that the applicant did not have, even the Visa to land in Pakistan, which was necessitated because there was no direct flight available in Lufthansa Lines to Kuwait.
It is conceded by the learned State Counsel that these points are of an important nature and require further inquiry. In spite of this she has objected to the grant of bail.
On perusal of the F. I. R. and the documents produced .before me, I think this is a fit case to allow the applicant ‑ bail, as the legal points involved, do require further inquiry and consideration to determine how far the applicant is responsible for committing the alleged offence of smuggling. He shall be released on bail on his furnishing of surety in the sum of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) and P. R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court, as he is a foreigner and would find it difficult to furnish any heavy surety whi6 is liable to amount as punishment.
The Passport of the applicant is seized by the Customs Authorities and was given temporarily, to the learned counsel, Mr. Abbasi for getting the visa endorsement, as Pakistan was not entered in the Passport. Mr. Abbasi undertakes to hand over the passport to the learned counsel for the State by 17th June, 1979.
Bail granted,
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer