https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44042 Customs officers were held not to be "police officers" for the custody provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, so a Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to order return of property seized by Customs before prosecution commenced. The Court reasoned that customs powers are directed to preventing smuggling, protecting revenue, and pursuing confiscation and penalties, not to filing charge-sheets under criminal procedure. At the same time, inherent powers could be used to grant interim custody of a seized trawler where no smuggled goods were found, lawful ownership and possession were shown, and continued detention risked deterioration; interim release was therefore allowed on bond and conditions. en-us Tue, 31 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jun 2010 16:53:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44042 Customs officers were held not to be "police officers" for the custody provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, so a Magistrate lacked jurisdiction to order return of property seized by Customs before prosecution commenced. The Court reasoned that customs powers are directed to preventing smuggling, protecting revenue, and pursuing confiscation and penalties, not to filing charge-sheets under criminal procedure. At the same time, inherent powers could be used to grant interim custody of a seized trawler where no smuggled goods were found, lawful ownership and possession were shown, and continued detention risked deterioration; interim release was therefore allowed on bond and conditions. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 31 Mar 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44042