Customs Duty Evasion | Mumbai Court Grants Bail to Accused in DRI Duty-Free Gold Diversion Case

The Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Mumbai, has granted bail to Ms. Rajpreet Kaur, who was arrested by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Mumbai, in connection with an alleged case of diversion of duty-free imported gold into the domestic market. The bail application was moved under Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking release of the accused. The applicant is accused of offences punishable under Section 135(1)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. According to the prosecution, Ms. Rajpreet Kaur was arrested on 28 January 2026 for her alleged role in aiding and abetting the diversion of duty-free imported gold into the open and domestic market. The DRI alleged that the accused was associated with a syndicate involved in the diversion of duty-free gold bars/bullions and that the offence resulted in evasion of customs duty to the tune of approximately Rs. 21.50 crore. The investigation agency further contended that the accused had been avoiding arrest and that her release on bail could hamper the ongoing investigation. Dr. Sujay Kantawala, counsel on behalf of the accused contended that she is a permanent resident of Amritsar, Punjab, and is presently settled in Hong Kong for business purposes. The alleged offence pertains to the year 2022 and that the investigation has been ongoing since then. The defence emphasized that the seizure of the alleged gold has already been effected by the department and that the statement of the applicant has been recorded. It was further submitted that there is no pending demand of duty against the applicant and that adjudication proceedings have already been initiated, which the applicant has challenged in accordance with law. Dr. Kantawala pointed out that the main accused in the case has already been granted bail and that no complaint had been filed against the present applicant despite the investigation continuing since 2022. It was argued that the applicant has cooperated with the investigation and is willing to continue to do so, and that continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose at the present stage. The Court observed that the allegations against the applicant are undoubtedly serious and relate to aiding and abetting the evasion of customs duty. However, the Court noted that the alleged offence dates back to the year 2022 and that the adjudication proceedings are already pending. The Court further observed that the investigation is still at an initial stage and may take considerable time to conclude. Taking into consideration the stage of the investigation, the period for which the applicant has remained in custody, and the fact that other accused persons have already been released on bail, the Court held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the incarceration of the applicant till the filing of the complaint or charge-sheet. The Court allowed the bail application and directed that Ms. Rajpreet Kaur be released on bail upon execution of a personal bond of ₹2,00,000 with one or two sureties in the like amount. The Court also permitted provisional release on furnishing a cash bail of ₹2,00,000 in lieu of surety for a period of two months. The Court imposed several conditions while granting bail, including a direction that the accused shall not influence or tamper with prosecution witnesses or evidence and shall cooperate with the investigation. The accused has been directed to remain present as and when called by the DRI during the course of investigation. The Court ordered the accused to surrender her passport to the respondent department for a period of six months from the date of arrest and restrained her from travelling abroad without prior permission of the Court. The accused has also been directed to furnish her residential address, contact details, and particulars of two nearest relatives to the Court and the department. Case Details Case Title: Ms. Rajpreet Kaur Versus UOI Case No.: R. A. NO. 116 OF 2026 Date: 07.02.2026 Counsel For Applicant: Dr. Sujay Kantawala Counsel For Respondent: Special PP R. K. Pathak Click Here To Read Order Read More: Consumer Protection Law | Unproven Claims Can’t Justify Crores in Compensation: Supreme Court Reduces Award Against ITC

Customs Duty Evasion | Mumbai Court Grants Bail to Accused in DRI Duty-Free Gold Diversion Case

Membership Required

Latest articles

CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Poultry Cage Weld Mesh

Commission Retained on Air Tickets Bought Through GSA/IATA Agents Not Taxable as Business Auxiliary Service

CENVAT Credit Can’t Be Denied on Duty-Paid Inputs from Area-Based Exempt Units: CESTAT

Ignoring Taxpayer’s Reply While Rejecting GST Refund Is Illegal: Bombay High Court

More like this

CESTAT Quashes Excise Duty Demand on Poultry Cage Weld Mesh

Commission Retained on Air Tickets Bought Through GSA/IATA Agents Not Taxable as Business Auxiliary Service

CENVAT Credit Can’t Be Denied on Duty-Paid Inputs from Area-Based Exempt Units: CESTAT

About us

Company

Categories