Nadeem v. Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence And ANR

AD 29 June 10, 2026 Ct. 28 SG CRM(A) 1025 of 2026 Reject An application for anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 in connection with Summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. And In the matter of: Nadeem ... petitioner Mr. Iqbal Hussain Mr. Rizwan Ali Chowdhury ... for the petitioner Mr. Kaushik Dey Mr. Tapan Bhanja ... for the DRI Authority Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The case is merely of making a mis-statement that the article which was to be exported was buffalo meat and not cow meat. A health certificate had duly been issued in this regard. The DRI authorities have the power to arrest the petitioner during the course of interrogation after registration of an FIR.

The petitioner, therefore, has a reasonable apprehension of arrest. Reliance is placed on the decision in Radhika Agarwal vs. the Union of India, reported at (2025) 6 SCC 545.

Learned counsel for the DRI authorities strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and relies on the copies of documents collected by the authorities. He submits that the DRI Authorities have the power to arrest the petitioner if they find that the answers given by the petitioner during

interrogation are not satisfactory. It transpired that not only had the petitioner misstated that the goods being exported were buffalo meat and not cow meat, but the petitioner had also used a forged health certificate purportedly issued in favour of his concern. This would be evident from the letter dated 24.03.2026 issued by the Joint Director(V&AH), T.G. Veterinary Biological & Research Institute, Hyderabad according to which the letter in question was a forged document. The authorities were taking necessary steps in respect of such forgery.

Considering the above and the other incriminating materials available in the case diary, I do not consider this to be a fit case for granting anticipatory bail. The application for anticipatory bail is, thus, rejected. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities.

(Jay Sengupta, J.)