1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 2731 OF 2009 Harshil Haren Choksey........ Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra ........Respondent. Mr. A.P. Mundargi Sr. counsel i/b I.A. Bagaria adv. for the Applicant Mrs. P.P. Shinde APP. for the Respondent/State. CORAM: A. P DESHPANDE, J. DATED : 23rd September,2009. P. C.: 1. The present application has been moved under section 438 Cr.P.C. for anticipatory bail as the applicant is apprehending arrest in FIR No.5/09 registered by Economic Offence Wing, Unit -1 for offence under sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120-B of IPC. According to the prosecution, pursuant to an order passed by the High Court in W.P. No.1064/07 a crime was registered with Malabar Hill police station which came to be transferred to economic wing unit-1 vide C.R. No. 60/08. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that 27 cars were illegally imported under T.R. Scheme. In all 23 persons came to be arrested and I am informed that all of them are released on bail. The father of the present applicant by name Hiren Choksey was also arrested as he 2 was involved in illegal import of eight vehicles. He had initially filed an application for anticipatory bail. How3ever the said application was withdrawn and the father of the present applicant surrendered himself. At a later point of time, he has been released on bail., Out of the eight vehicles which are illegally imported allegedly by the father of the applicant, the present applicant is connected with two of the vehicles. 2. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, at the time when the incident of import had taken place, the present applicant was a young boy of about 20 years and was taking education, His bank account has been used by his father and the present applicant is not connected with the crime. Record reveals that amount has been withdrawn from the account of the present applicant for the purpose of payment of duty,. A loan as well has been obtained from the bank in the name of present applicant, which amount has been used for payment of the customs duty. The learned counsel for the applicant has invited my attention to an affidavit dated 5-5-2009 filed by the respondent in reply to the application moved by the father of the applicant for anticipatory bail in this court. Touching the two cars which constitute the subject matter of the present application, the case of the prosecution is set out in para 9(c) and 9(f) which reads thus: “9(c). In case of Motor Vehicle MH01-YA-7000 the vehicle is imported in name of Ajikumar Hasan Mohamed Hasniyar. The vehicle was declared as 1998 model at time of import to custom 3 authority and while registering at R.T.O. It was shown as 2005 model. The vehicle is presently in the name of Sachin Jagdish Joshi when enquiry was made with Sachin Joshi, it was revealed that he purchased the said car from the applicant. The custom duty regarding these vehicle was paid from the account in Karur Vaishya Bank which was operated by applicant. 9(f). In case of Motor Vehicle MH01-YA-2201 the vehicle is imported in name of Abboobacker Moideen. The vehicle was declared as 2001 model at time of import to custom authority and while registering at R.T.O. It was shown as 2004 model. The vehicle is still in the name of importer. The custom duty regarding this vehicle was paid from the account in Karur Vaishya Bank Prabhadevi Branch, which was operated by applicant. The vehicle is in possession of one of he witness. The applicant contracted the said witness and give direction that Police is investigating the matter of imported car so don’t drive the car and hide the vehicle. The applicant also called the said witness in Nanavati Hospital and directed him not to disclose his name to the investigating agency regarding purchase of the said vehicles. The witness has surrendered the vehicle before the investigating agency on 01-05-09. The applicant is behind the import and sale of said vehicle.” 3. Perusal of the said paragraphs leaves no room of doubt that 4 it was asserted that the father of the present applicant (who was the applicant in criminal application seeking anticipatory bail) sold the cars and the duty was paid from the Bank account standing in the name of the present applicant operated by his father. My attention is also invited to the remand applications moved by the prosecution, in an application filed by the father of the applicant for regular bail and the reply filed by the prosecution to the application moved by the applicant’s father. Perusal of the remand applications and the reply filed by the prosecution in the proceedings for regular bail moved by the father of the applicant, it is revealed that it has been the case of the prosecution that the father of the applicant was responsible and was involved in the crime. According to the learned APP the present applicant as well is involved in the crime for the reason that the customs duty has been paid from the bank account of the present applicant and one of the purchaser of the car has also issued cheque in the name of the present applicant. The applicant has placed on record an affidavit duly sworn to substantiate the fact that at the time when the crime was committed, he was taking education and though had a bank account, the same was operated at the behest of his father. 4. Prima facie I am of the view, after perusing the material on record including the statements of witnesses, that the father of the present applicant was in charge of the business and the present applicant used to sign the cheques as desired by his father. The 5 applicant’s father has also written letters to the I.O., one of such letters is dated 27-4-2009 wherein he has stated that it is he who has operated the applicant’s bank account and transacted the business and hence the present applicant would not be in a position to explain the transactions and it would be he who would be in a position to explain the cash and bank transactions pertaining to his son. 5. The applicant has been granted interim protection by an order dated 24-6-2009 and the same has been continued. By an order dated 15-7-2009 the applicant was directed to attend the police station daily between 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. It is not in dispute that since then till 28-7-2009 i.e. for a period of two weeks the applicant has attended the police station, during which period the applicant was interrogated and his statement as well was recorded. 6. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances, in my view this is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the present applicant. The learned APP submits that in the event if the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he be directed to attend the office of the respondent once a fortnight till filing of the charge sheet. In that view of the matter I pass the following order. i) In the event of arrest of the present applicant in FIR No. 5/09 registered by Economic Offence Wing, Unit -1 for offence under sections 465, 467, 468, 471, 420 and 120-B of IPC, he shall be released on bail on executing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. 6 ii) The applicant shall not leave India without prior permission of the trial court. Iii) The applicant shall deposit his passport with the respondent within one week from today. iv) The applicant shall attend the office of the respondent once in a fortnight on every alternate Saturday till filing of the charge sheet. v) The applicant shall abide by the conditions stipulated in section 438(2) Cr.P.C. vi) The applicant is permitted to deposit bail amount in cash for a period of three weeks within which time the applicant shall arrange for the surety. The application stands disposed of. (A. P. Deshpande, J.)