Page 180 - ELT_15th July 2020_Vol 373_Part 2

162 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373

“6.1 Further, the contention of the Learned Counsel for the appellant
saying that the appellants were not subjected to cross-examination is not
tenable in law because the appellants never retracted their statements at
any point of time and in their original statements made before the Customs
Officer under Section 108, they have clearly admitted their involvement in
smuggling activity on payment of remuneration. The versions of the appel-
lants given before the Customs Officer were also proved from their
WhatsApp communication.”
11. In the light of aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered view
there is no substantial question of law involved in this appeal for being admitted,
adjudicated and answered. Hence, we proceed to pass the following :
JUDGMENT
(i) Appeal is dismissed.
(ii) Order dated 6-8-2019 passed by CESTAT in Final Order No.
20618/2019 stands affirmed [2019 (370) E.L.T. 1399 (Tri.-Bang.)].
(iii) No order as to costs.
12. In view of appeal having been dismissed, I.A. No. 1/2020 for stay
does not survive for consideration and it stands dismissed.

_______

2020 (373) E.L.T. 162 (Mad.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

C.V. Karthikeyan, J.
INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, DRI, CHENNAI
Versus

M. RAVINDRAN
Crl. O.P. No. 9750 of 2019, decided on 21-11-2019
1
Bail - Cancellation by Sessions Judge - Accused applied for default
bail at 10.30 a.m. on 181st day from remand - On same day, without seeking
extension of time to file final report, prosecution filed additional complaint at
4.25 p.m. implicating two more accused, enclosing further documents, state-
ments, and mobile phones recovered forwarded to forensic - Without discus-
sion on additional complaint, bail granted on the ground that indefeasible
right to bail had accrued to accused - HELD : Sessions Court works from time it
sits till time it rises - No advantage can be taken on the ground that petition
filed at 10.30 a.m. be considered first and later complaint filed at 4.25 p.m. be
rejected - Bail granted on the ground of indefeasible right, set aside - Madras
High Court Criminal Rules of Practice and Circular Orders, 1958 - Section
167(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. [paras 13]
Petition allowed
CASES CITED
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Louis Jaly @ Muthukrishna
— 2006 Supreme (Mad) 409 — Referred ....................................................................................... [Para 5]
________________________________________________________________________
1 In appeal against this order, notice was issued by Supreme Court in 2020 (373) E.L.T. A55 (S.C).
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th July 2020  180