Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37552 Court No. - 17 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7312 of 2024 Petitioner :- Tanveer Mustafa Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. Addl. Director General Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence Lucknow Zonal Unit Counsel for Petitioner :- D.P. Dutt Tiwari,Sabih Ahmed Counsel for Respondent :- Digvijay Nath Dubey,Anurag Verma (Amicus),Kuldeep Srivastava Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J. C.M. Application No.IA/9/2025 (Application for Modification) 1. Heard on the application for modification of the order dated 03.03.2025. 2. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner, following modification is being incorporated in the order dated 03.03.2025:- a. In the 8th line of fifth paragraph, words "It is further submitted that thereafter summon was issued by Renuka Keshavrao Paunikar, Senior Intelligence Officer, DRI, Lucknow and it was served on the petitioner at the place of residence, where the petitioner was present." shall be read as "It is further submitted that the summon was prepared by Ms. Renuka Keshavrao Paunikar, Senior Intelligence Officer, DRI, Lucknow and served to the petitioner at the airport on the spot, and thereafter, Constable- Siddharth Patel, went to the given residential address of the petitioner to verify the same". 3. Remaining portion of the order dated 03.03.2025 shall remain intact. 4. Modification application is accordingly allowed. 5. This order shall be provided along with the order dated 03.03.2025. Order on petition 6. In pursuance of earlier order, Ms. Renuka Keshavrao Paunikar, the then Senior Intelligence Officer, DRI, Lucknow, presently posted as Superintendent (Custom), Lucknow is present before this Court. 7. Original record which was kept in sealed cover is opened in the Court by the Bench Secretary and the same is handed over to Ms. Renuka Keshavrao Paunikar after taking photocopy of the same on record. 8. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 9. The present petition has been filed with the following prayer: "I. Issue a writ, order or direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari, quashing the impugned remand order dated 09.08.2024 issued by the Court of Learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate (Custom), Lucknow, which is Annexure No. 1 of the Writ Petition. II. Issue a writ, order or direction or writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing immediate release of the innocent Petitioner who is presently languishing in Lucknow Central Jail in DRI CASE NO. -16/2024 registered by the Lucknow Zonal Unit of the dated 07 & 08/08/2024 under sections - 135(1) (1) (A) for offence u/s 135(1) (b) and 135(1) (c) of Customs Act, 1962. III. Issue any other writ, order or direction as may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, in favour of the innocent Petitioner protecting his rights and interests, may also be issued." 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the illegal remand order was passed by learned Magistrate without considering the entire proceeding conducted by the officers of DRI, Lucknow, therefore, same is liable to be set aside. In support of this submission, he also relies on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Prabir Purkayastha Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 934 and submits that in the said case, Hon'ble Apex Court set aside the remand order as it was found illegal. In the present case, it is admitted by the officer who is present before this Court that notice under Section 102 of Customs Act was given to the petitioner at the airport after landing the flight in question on 07.08.2024 after 10:30 PM, thereafter, summons were also handed over to the petitioner but he was produced before the learned Magistrate on 09.08.2024 which is in clear violation of Section 124 of Customs Act. In such circumstances, kind indulgence of this Court is necessary. 11. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the law relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner is not applicable in the present case as the petitioner is on bail and the compliant has already been filed. He further submits that once, the petitioner is released on bail, the present petition has become infructuous. 12. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the contents of present petitioner as well as other relevant documents, it is an undisputed fact that the petitioner has already been enlarged on bail in compliance of the order of this Court dated 27.01.2025 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.11578 of 2024. It is also evident that the complaint has already been filed before the Competent Court. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the present petition has lost its efficacy and is liable to be dismissed. 13. Accordingly, the present petition is hereby dismissed as infructuous. 14. However, it is open to the petitioner to take appropriate remedy if, he is feeling aggrieved with the action of the agency. 15. Presence of officer is hereby dispensed with. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 V. Sinha Digitally signed by :- VAISHALI SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench