The Bombay High Court has granted bail to a customs officer, Vineet Kumar Dhattarwal allegedly involved in a bribery case.
The bench of Justice N. R. Borkar granted the bail post filing of the chargesheet against the Customs Officer for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000 with one or two sureties in the like amount.
The Applicant is working as a Superintendent of Customs at Nhava Sheva, Navi Mumbai. He is a highly reputed person and has deep roots in society. He has no criminal antecedents against him.
A shipment of the Complainant’s company i.e. M/s Barna International India Ltd. landed in JNPT Port from Jebel Ali Port, UAE containing TOLUNE DI-ISOCYANATE chemical. Complainant had submitted some documents of said shipment to the Customs Department through his CHA Sh. Ram Bodake for Custom Clearance. This shipment was detained by SIIB agency of Customs for some queries.
The shipment was examined by the Applicant, an SIIB officer in the presence of the Complainant. It is alleged that after examination the said shipment was sent for testing to Customs DYCC lab and the lab has given a no objection report. However it is alleged that the Applicant was not releasing the said container.
The Applicant sent summons to the Complainant’s Company for submission of some documents related to the container. The Complainant met the Applicant at his office at about 1500 Hrs at Customs House, JNCH, Nhava Sheva and discussed his queries for the release of said container. It is alleged that during discussion the Applicant demanded Rs. 5,00,000 as bribe for releasing the container. After that it is alleged that the bribe was demanded repeatedly through CHA Ram Bodake.
Dr. Sujay Kantawala, the Counsel for the Customs Official contended that the SIIB (Import) department is headed by the Commissioner of Customs. After the investigation and submission of reports, all the final decisions are taken by the Commissioner of Customs. Applicant is not the final authority to order release of the shipment and his role as a Superintendent was very limited, therefore, the question of demanding bribe for releasing the shipment does not arise. The complainant has made false allegations only in order to escape the liability of demurrage charges. The applicant is in jail for about two months and detention of the applicant is not necessary as the investigation is completed.
CBI contended that the applicant is involved in a serious crime of demand and acceptance of bribes. It is submitted that the present applicant demanded Rs.5 Lakhs as bribe through co-accused Ramnath Bodke and after negotiation, accepted Rs.2.5 Lakh from the complainant. Considering the nature of offence the applicant may not be released on bail.
The court allowed the Criminal Bail Application.
Case Details
Case Title: Vineet Kumar Dhattarwal Versus The Union of India
Case No.: BAIL APPLICATION NO. 421 OF 2025
Date: 11 March, 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Dr. Sujay Kantawala
Counsel For Respondent: Kuldeep S. Patil
Read More: Selling Goods At Higher MRP Does Not Establish Intention To Evade Service Tax: CESTAT
