Locus standi in customs confiscation fails where the claimant disowns seized gold and never asserts ownership or possession.

A person who disowns seized gold ornaments and gold bars and never asserts ownership or possession lacks locus standi to challenge their confiscation. The confiscation was based on unchallenged facts showing recovery under a reasonable belief of illicit importation, and the appellant's attack on the department's proof of smuggling could not assist a claimant who had denied any connection with the goods. Confiscation under customs law operates in rem, so independent criminal proceedings do not control departmental adjudication. Acquittal in the criminal case did not affect the confiscation, and a criminal court's order regarding property could not override a valid customs confiscation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had locus standi to challenge the confiscation of the seized gold ornaments and gold bars when he had disowned the goods and never claimed ownership or possession in the adjudication proceedings.

Analysis: The confiscation proceeded on the basis of unchallenged facts that the goods were recovered under a reasonable belief of illicit importation and that the appellant had never claimed the disputed ornaments and gold bars at any stage. The appeal challenged only the alleged failure of the department to prove smuggling, but that contention could not assist a person who had consistently denied ownership and recovery of the very goods in question. The decision also reaffirmed that confiscation under the customs law is a proceeding in rem, while criminal prosecution is independent and does not control departmental adjudication. The acquittal in the criminal case did not affect the confiscation proceedings, and the criminal court's power under the procedural law to order delivery of property did not override confiscation validly made under customs law.

Conclusion: The appellant had no locus standi to question the confiscation, and the confiscation of the disputed gold ornaments and gold bars was upheld.

---