F.Shajahan vs State of Tamil Nadu

P. Dhanabal, J

The petitioner / A1, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 135, 135(A) r/w.Section 104 of Customs Act, 1962 in F.No. DRI/ ZU/ 23/ 2025- ADD/JD-1 O/o.ADG-DRI-ZU- Chennai on the file of the respondent seeks bail.

The case of the prosecution is that on 23.02.2026 at about 6.30 hrs the petitioner's residential premises were searched by the respondent officials and during search they found eight registers having investment and expenditure particulars and they were seized. Hence the case.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent have registered a false case against the petitioner alleging that on 23.02.2026 at about 6.30 hrs the residential premises of the petitioner was searched by the respondent officials and during search they found eight registers having investment and expenditure particulars but no recovery of sand sanders from the petitioner. However the petitioner has been wrongly implicated in this case and the petitioner has not given any statement as claimed by the prosecution. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner, therefore he prays to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent would submit that 153 red sanders logs weighing approximately 4.65 MT and valued at Rs.2.3 crores was seized at three different locations. The petitioner along with one Sathik Ali engaged in clandestine procurement, storage, transportation and attempted export of red sander logs a species prohibited for export under the Foreign Trade Policy and under the Wild Life (Protection ) Act. The intelligence further revealed that the syndicate was operating through multiple godowns in Tamil Nadu using front persons, rented premises, fabricated vehicle numbers and hawala channels to facilitate smuggling to foreign buyers in Malaysia and further routed to Vietnam and China. During investigation the petitioner gave a voluntarily statement under Section 108 of Customs Act and the petitioner admitted that one Shajahan was known to him and he told him that he had exported the red sanders logs to Malaysia and the same were lying in Malaysia unsold and he asked his help to sell in Malaysia who could buy the red sanders logs and offered him commission for arrangement of a buyer for red sander logs in Malaysia. Thereafter the petitioner contacted one Ashok Pillai in Malaysia and informed him about the red sanders and he identified some buyers in Malaysia and arranged for purchase of the red sander logs pertaining to Sadiq Ali and he earned some commission in that transaction. Since he was in regular contact with the Ashok Pillai and whenever he required any red sanders logs used to contact him. Accordingly till now they have contact with other and have handled 11 export consignments of red sander through Tuticorin port and the investigation is at the initial stage and therefore prayed to dismiss the petition.

This Court heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

Considering the rival submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also considering the fact that no any contraband was recovered from this petitioner and only registers were alone recovered from this petitioner and also the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and also the fact that the statement was recorded by the respondent and also taking into consideration the period of incarceration suffered by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner subject to the following conditions:

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on condition to execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Kulithalai and on further conditions that:

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent daily at 10.30 a.m until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, or of the commission of which he is suspected;

[d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

[e] the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence;

[f] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner 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].

[g] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 BNS.