Provisional release of seized gold jewellery lies with statutory customs discretion, not writ court direction.

Provisional release of seized gold jewellery must be sought under the statutory customs scheme, because the decision to grant release lies with the competent adjudicating authority's discretion. The writ court should not itself direct release or prescribe how that discretion is to be exercised. Where seizure has already been followed by a show cause notice, the proper course is for the claimant to apply for provisional release on the bond, security and conditions required by law, and for the authority to consider the request after hearing the claimant and pass orders accordingly.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ court should itself direct release of the seized gold jewellery or require the petitioner to pursue provisional release before the competent customs authority under the statutory scheme.

Analysis: The order noticed that a show cause notice had already been issued after seizure. It also noted the statutory provision enabling provisional release of seized goods pending adjudication on such bond, security and conditions as the Commissioner of Customs may require. The Court held that the decision whether to grant provisional release lies within the discretion of the adjudicating authority and that the writ court should not itself exercise that discretion or prescribe the manner of its exercise. The petitioner was therefore directed to file, if not already filed, an application under the statutory provision, and the competent authority was directed to consider it and pass orders in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner within two weeks.

Outcome: The petition was disposed of by directing consideration of the petitioner's application for provisional release by the competent customs authority.

---