1 Appln 1159-10 Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1159 OF 2010 The Deputy Director, ..Applicant Directorate of Revenue Intelligence V/s. Mrs. Chandra Kanta & anr. ..Respondents Ms Nitee Punde, Advocate, for the Applicant Mr.N.P.Shukla i/b.Mr.V.Verma, Advocate, for Respondent No.1 Mr.J.P.Kharge, APP, for Respondent No.2 - State CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATE : 8TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C. . DRI seeks cancellation of bail granted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay by order dated 22nd February, 2010 to respondent No.1 against whom a complaint for commission of an offence punishable under Sections 120B, 489B, 489C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 132, 135(1)(a), 135(1) (b) both read with Section 135(1)(i)C of the Customs Act, 1962 has been filed before the 2 Appln 1159-10 Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Greater Bombay. The Magistrate has in turn committed case to the Court of Sessions. The learned Counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that the offence which the respondent No.1 is alleged to have committed was one under Section 489B punishable with imprisonment for life and therefore, the learned Additional Sessions Judge should have seen this. He further submits that the learned Judge should not have admitted the respondent to bail without waiting for the department to file a complaint, which the department did within the stipulated period. 2. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. 3. Perusal of the complaint made before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, which is foundation of prosecution would show that DRI had received intelligence that on 22nd 3 Appln 1159-10 December, 2009 counterfeit currency notes were to be brought by two persons at Andheri Railway Station in red coloured trolley having marking 'Sky Club'. According to the recitals in the complaint, respondent No.1 Mrs.Chandra Kanta agreed to accompany one Ashok from Delhi to Mumbai where they were to receive counterfeit currency notes in bag which are Maria was supposed to give to the respondent. Accordingly, officers keep a watch and after intercepting the persons found the bags, Ashok had kept both the bags in an Auto Rickshaw and then travelled to Andheri Railway Station where DRI officers caught both of them. The bags were found to contain counterfeit currency notes of the denomination of Rs.500/- worth Rs.7,00,000/- each in both the bags. These facts as narrated in the complaint make it uncertain if the respondent had received the bags. It was Ashok, who had placed the bags in the Auto Rickshaw and respondent Mrs.Chandra Kanta was also with him. In any 4 Appln 1159-10 case, it would be for the trial Judge to decide as to whether the respondent also received the bags or could be roped in by having its re-course to Section 34 or Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. On the allegation in the complaint, the prima facie offence is made out under Section 489C of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 i. e. possession of the counterfeit currency notes which is punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years and is also bailable and not are punishable under Section 489B with imprisonment for life. The offences under the Customs Act are punishable with imprisonment up to seven years. 4. Considering this and also considering the fact that after completion of investigation, DRI has filed a complaint before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate rationale of insisting on departmental custody is not clear to me. 5 Appln 1159-10 5. In view of this, no case for cancellation of bail is made out. Criminal Application is rejected. (R.C.CHAVAN, J.)