Delhi HC denies pre-arrest bail to accused in red sandalwood smuggling-theft case
Mar 12, 2022
New Delhi [India], March 12 : The Delhi High Court recently denied pre-arrest bail to an accused named in an alleged red sandalwood smuggling-theft case.
It is alleged that the petitioner had booked a train ticket for six people. One of the accused was arrested on February 3, 2022, at New Delhi Railway Station. He was carrying the red sandalwood/red sanders in his bag from Vishakhapatnam to New Delhi.
Justice Asha Menon dismissed the pre-arrest bail plea moved by Mukhter Ahmed and observed, "When it is clear that it is necessary to arrest the accused for proper investigation of the offence or preventing the accused from causing evidence to disappear or even to prevent the person from committing further offences, including of similar nature, the police officer can make an arrest."
The High Court referring to the Supreme Court judgement in Arnesh Kumar case observed, " In the present case, the Investigation Officer (IO) has to find out all the links in this smuggling of red sandalwood/red senders, the extent of theft and smuggling and person involved and ultimately, the role of the applicant as the king-pin of the entire activity on account of which he financed the travel expenses of the persons he had sent to Vishakhapatnam from Delhi."
This is not a case in which the applicant deserves pre-arrest bail. The anticipatory bail application is accordingly dismissed, the court said in March 10 order.
The Court said that it is also to be noted that the applicant has been most reluctant to join the investigation. The IO is thus unable to move forward in tracing out the links.
Advocate Amit Gupta, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) had opposed the application on the ground that the applicant has not participated in investigations, though a month has gone by and even after his first application for anticipatory bail was dismissed by the Sessions Court on 10 February 2022.
It was further submitted that co-accused Arif during his interrogation had stated that he was an employee of the applicant whereas now, it was being claimed that Arif was a freelancer and had only a business connection with the applicant. Six tickets had been booked through the wife of the applicant and a mere business relationship does not explain this fact. It was necessary to investigate the role of the applicant as smuggling and theft of red sandalwood/red sanders was a serious matter.
On the other hand, the counsel for the applicant/petitioner had argued that Arif was a freelancer who used to make leather and other goods from the applicant to sell in various parts of the country to earn a living and it is due to his connection that the tickets were booked on the mobile phone of the wife of the applicant.
It was contended that the FIR was registered under sections of theft and recovery but what was stated in the status report filed by the police was that the log of the red sandalwood/ red sanders had been smuggled and that Arif has been found without a transit permit to move the wood from Vishakhapatnam to Delhi. There was no reference to a theft.
He submitted that the no case of forest Act is made out against the applicant and in any case, the punishment prescribed was only imprisonment for six months or a fine. Thus the applicant could not be arrested. He also said there was a delay in the registration of FIR.
