2024 (3) TMI 296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s to direct the second appellant to release and return the seized gold bars totally weighing 795 grams covered by O.S. No. 491/2022 AIU A Batch. 3. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it was stated by the respondent-writ petitioner that on 13.05.2022, he travelled from Colombo to Chennai via Indigo Flight No. 6E 1208 and reached Anna International Airport, Chennai. On his arrival, the officials of the appellants subjected him to physical check up and noticed that he was in possession of 795 grams of gold bars in paste form, valued at Rs. 36,18,045/-. In connection with the possession of gold bars, a case in O.S. No. 491/2022 AIU A Batch was registered. Upon registration of the case, the respondent was directed to pay Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....045/-. The respondent had committed an offence punishable under Section 2 (33) of the Act and therefore, the goods are liable to be confiscated under Section 111 (d) and (h) of the Act. The release of the goods is only provisional and not absolute and that, on culmination of the adjudication proceedings, the authority may grant the respondent an option to pay fine in lieu of confiscation under Section 125 of the Act. While so, a Mandamus, as prayed for by the respondent need not be granted at this stage. Accordingly, the appellants prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. By order dated 23.08.2023, the learned Judge, upon hearing the counsel for both sides, allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent by referring to the earlier ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed for in the writ petition. The respondent has filed the writ petition praying to issue only a Mandamus, however, the learned Judge went on to set aside the Order-in-Original dated 27.03.2023 passed by the first appellant. Thus, the relief granted by the learned Judge is beyond the scope of writ petition and it is legally not sustainable. Continuing further, it is submitted that when the appellants have initiated adjudication proceedings, the respondent has to subject himself to such proceedings and wait for the outcome of the same, but he rushed to the writ Court and filed the writ petition, which is not maintainable. Thus, according to the learned counsel, the relief granted by the learned Judge to return the confiscated goods to the res....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2022 passed in WP (MD) No. 3456 of 2022, which was relied on by the learned Judge, is not applicable to this case. In that case, it was noticed that the gold jewellery seized from the passengers were a chain and a bracelet for their personal use. Therefore, it was thought it fit to direct release of those goods. Whereas, in the instant case, the respondent had smuggled the gold bars in the form of paste to avoid being detected during frisking. The gold bars smuggled in the form of paste by the respondent cannot be equated with that of the personal belongings, such as chain and bracelet in the case relied on by the learned Judge. Therefore, the learned Senior Panel Counsel prayed for allowing this writ appeal by setting aside the order of t....