Elanangai Govindarajan v. The Superintendent Of Customs,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18-12-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR CRL OP NO.34705 of 2025 Elanangai Govindarajan Petitioner Vs The Superintendent of Customs, AIU D Batch, New Customs House, Meenambakkam, Chennai - 600 027.
O.S. No.68/2025 - INT Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner in O.S. No.68/2025 INT (AIR) on the file of the respondent. For Petitioners:
Mr.A.Ganesh For Respondent:
Mr.K.Purushothaman Special Public Prosecutor
ORDER
The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody
on 02.11.2025 for the alleged offence punishable under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 in O.S. No.68/2025-INT (AIR), on the file of the respondent, seeks bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.11.2025 at about 22.31 hours, acting on specific intelligence, officers of the Air Intelligence Unit (AIU), Chennai, intercepted five passengers arriving from Kuala Lumpur by Air Asia Flight No.AK-13 at the Arrival Hall of Chennai International Airport, in the presence of independent witnesses; though the passengers denied carrying any dutiable goods, as they appeared nervous, they were taken to the AIU room with their hand baggage, informed of their rights under Section 102 of the Customs Act, 1962, which they waived and on personal search of Ms.Govindharaj Elanangai, five yellow-coloured metal flat bars suspected to be gold, were recovered from her, while her baggage contained only personal effects.
The said bars were examined by a Government-approved Gold Assayer and certified to be 24-carat gold weighing 2,460 grams and valued at Rs.2,80,38,957/- and as no valid import documents or proof of duty payment were produced, the gold along with the concealment material was seized under mahazar in O.S.No.887/2025-AIU-D dated 01.11.
Customs Act, 1962 and the accused was arrested on the same day. Hence, the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner, aged, 21 years, being a lady was arrested for alleged possession of gold valued at less than Rs.1 crore, which constitutes a bailable offence. He further submitted that by clubbing the alleged possession of all the five accused, the offence has been made as nonbailable. He further submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 02.11.2025. He further submitted that the properties were recovered and that she has no previous case against her. Hence, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that there are totally five accused in this case and the petitioner is ranked as A1. He further submitted that the investigation revealed that the petitioner, along with the other four accused, had travelled abroad on three occasions and had smuggled gold, though no previous case was registered against her. According to the prosecution, this is the fourth time in which the petitioner was intercepted for smuggling of gold and contraband was
recovered. He further submitted that the investigation is not concluded and hence, opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record including the First Information Report.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the fact that the property was recovered from the petitioner, though it is stated that earlier the petitioner traveled to foreign countries for smuggling gold and there was no previous case registered against her, and also considering the period of her incarceration, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on her executing a bond for a sum of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with two sureties, for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Customs Act and other related cases, Alandur, and on further conditions that:- [a] the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to
ensure their identity;
[b] the petitioners shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., for a period of four weeks and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[c] the petitioners shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;
[d] the petitioners shall not tamper with the evidence or witness either during investigation or trial; [e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560];
[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.
18.12.2025 drl Note:
1. Registry is directed to forthwith upload this order in the Official Website of this Court.
2. All concerned to act on this order being uploaded in Official Website of this Court without insisting on certified hard copies. To be noted, this order when uploaded in the official website of this Court will be watermarked and will also have a QR code.
To 1.The Judicial Magistrate, Special Court for Exclusive Trial of Customs Act and other related cases, Alandur, 2.The Superintendent of Customs, AIU D Batch, Customs House, Meenambakkam, Chennai - 600 027.
3.The Superintendent, Special Prison for Women, Puzhal, Chennai.
4.The Special Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
K.RAJASEKAR, J., drl CRL OP NO.34705 of 2025 18.12.2025