Customs seizure and CrPC powers: perishable goods cannot be disposed under Section 451 while customs adjudication remains pending.

The Customs Act, 1962 was treated as a complete code for seizure, confiscation, adjudication, release and appeal in customs matters, and the Disposal Manual 2019 was held to operate only within that framework. Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could not be used by the criminal court to direct disposal of goods seized under customs law, because the manual did not create an independent source of CrPC power. The fact that the goods were dry dates with a short shelf life did not justify invoking Section 451 while customs adjudication was still pending; the earlier view that Section 451 does not apply to such customs-seized goods was followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the criminal court had jurisdiction under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to direct disposal of goods seized under the Customs Act, 1962 and treated as perishable under the Disposal Manual 2019.

Analysis: The Customs Act, 1962 was treated as a complete and self-contained code governing import-related seizure, confiscation, adjudication, penalty, release and appeal. The disposal scheme in the Disposal Manual 2019 was read as operating within the customs framework and not as an independent source of power under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The seized goods were dry dates having a short shelf life, but the Court held that perishability by itself did not authorise invocation of Section 451 where the goods were under customs seizure and the matter was still within the customs adjudicatory process. The earlier view that Section 451 CrPC does not apply to such customs seized goods was followed.

Conclusion: Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could not be invoked to direct disposal of the customs-seized goods, and the impugned order was unsustainable.

---