Provisional release of seized goods must be considered promptly after hearing the importer, with merits left open.

Pending provisional release of seized goods under the Customs Act was required to be considered promptly by the adjudicating authority, which had to grant the petitioner a hearing and complete the exercise within seven days. The Court did not examine the merits of the seizure or the underlying investigation, leaving those issues open. The operative effect was a limited protective direction ensuring expeditious consideration of the release application while preserving the substantive dispute for later decision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner's application for provisional release of the seized goods was required to be considered by the adjudicating authority within a fixed time after giving an opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: The writ petition challenged the seizure order issued under Section 110(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. In view of the petitioner's pending application for provisional release and the continuing burden arising from retention of the goods, the Court directed the adjudicating authority to consider the application forthwith. The authority was also required to afford the petitioner an opportunity of hearing and complete the exercise within seven days. The Court expressly declined to examine the merits of the dispute.

Conclusion: The application for provisional release was directed to be considered expeditiously after hearing the petitioner, and the merits of the seizure or investigation were left open.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition was disposed of with a limited protective direction for prompt consideration of provisional release, without any adjudication on the merits of the controversy.

---