Foreign currency non-declaration justifies confiscation, but lack of concealment and no mala fide intent can reduce penalties.

Foreign currency carried by a passenger was treated as technically liable to confiscation for non-declaration, but the surrounding facts showed it was not concealed, there was no legal bar to import, and the omission was linked to language difficulty and absence of mala fide intent. The passenger's prolonged incarceration was also relevant to the quantum of monetary consequences. The confiscation was sustained, while the redemption fine and personal penalty were reduced.

---

---

Issues: Whether the foreign currency carried by the passenger was liable to confiscation for non-declaration, and whether the redemption fine and personal penalty required reduction in the circumstances.

Analysis: The foreign currency was not concealed, there was no legal bar to its import, and the non-declaration was attributed to poor English comprehension, communication difficulty, and lack of mala fide intent. The circumstances also showed that the appellant had been under incarceration for more than five weeks, which was relevant for determining the quantum of penalty. The currency was therefore technically liable to confiscation, but the surrounding facts justified interference with the monetary consequences imposed by the adjudicating authority.

Conclusion: The confiscation was sustained, but the redemption fine and personal penalty were reduced.

Final Conclusion: The order was modified only as to the quantum of fine and penalty, while the substantive confiscation finding was maintained.

---