Privacy and arbitrariness in search powers: amended stamp law inspection and seizure provision struck down for lack of safeguards.

Section 73 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as amended in Andhra Pradesh, was unconstitutional because it authorised inspection, entry, seizure and impounding of documents in private or bank custody without prior reasonable basis, recorded satisfaction, clear safeguards or guiding standards. The Court found the power disproportionately intrusive, arbitrary and the product of excessive delegation, especially as the Act already contained other mechanisms to secure stamp revenue. The absence of objective limits on access to confidential documents violated privacy and rendered the provision inconsistent with Articles 14 and 21. The amended section was therefore unenforceable, and the constitutional challenge succeeded.

---

---

Issues: Whether section 73 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as amended in its application to Andhra Pradesh by the Andhra Pradesh Amendment Act, 1986, was constitutionally valid.

Analysis: The amended provision enabled inspection, entry into premises, seizure and impounding of documents in private custody or bank custody without any requirement of prior reasonable basis, recorded satisfaction, or other safeguards. It also authorized the Collector to empower any person without guiding standards, and thereby permitted intrusive access to confidential documents affecting privacy of persons and customers of banks. The Court held that the existing statutory scheme elsewhere in the Stamp Act, including liability to duty, impounding, recovery of duty and penalty, already protected revenue, while the impugned provision was disproportionate, arbitrary, and vitiated by excessive delegation. The absence of safeguards and standards rendered the intrusion into privacy unreasonable and inconsistent with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

Conclusion: Section 73, as amended in Andhra Pradesh, was held unconstitutional and unenforceable.

Final Conclusion: The constitutional challenge succeeded, and the appeals failed because the amended inspection and seizure power under the Stamp Act could not be sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory power authorizing search, inspection and seizure of confidential documents must contain clear safeguards, objective standards and a reasonable basis for exercise, failing which it is arbitrary, disproportionately intrusive, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

---