1 CA-4007.10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE  CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.4007 OF 2010 Ashish Rajinder Kapila .... Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondents S/Shri A.H.H. Ponda and Suresh Jain for the Applicant. Ms Poonam Bhosale, APP, for the State. Shri Francis E. Saldanha, Special Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.2-UoI. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: SEPTEMBER 23, 2010 P.C: I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned counsel for the Union of India. The applicant may have an excellent case on merit but the applicant is shown to have not attended the office of the Customs Department (CIU) when the applicant was granted interim relief by the Sessions Court. The applicant has stated in para 3 of the application that he never disobeyed any summons except for the fact that he was served with certain summons deliberately knowing that the 2 CA-4007.10 dates are clashing with the dates in the Sessions Court and, therefore, could not remain present. The learned counsel for the Customs Department tendered a chart to show the number of dates on which the applicant did not attend the office of the Customs Department. The learned counsel for the applicant is unable to show that at least some of these dates, except the 15th and the 18th of June, 2010, were the dates fixed for hearing in the Sessions Court. If the applicant has not followed the summons of the Customs Department during the period when he was granted interim relief by the Sessions Court and makes a wrong statement in the application, he is not entitled to bail from this Court. The application is rejected. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)