Kerala High Court
Chandralekha Usha Kumar vs The Customs Commissioner, Cochin on 12 September, 2024
Author: P Gopinath
Bench: P Gopinath
2024:KER:69665
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 21ST BHADRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 30063 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
LISHA USHA KUMAR,
AGED 19 YEARS,
LEKSHMI SADANAM, KULICKAMPALAM, PULIYOOR.P.O, ALAPUZHA,
PIN - 689511.
BY ADV PRAVEEN K. JOY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CUSTOMS COMMISSIONER, COCHIN,
CUSTOMS HOUSE, WILLINGTON ISLAND KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 009.
2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CIAL COCHIN,
KOCHI,ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 031.
BY ADV V.GIRISHKUMAR, SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT
TAXES AND CUSTOMS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.09.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).30167/2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NOS. 30063 AND 30167 OF 2024
2
2024:KER:69665
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 / 21ST BHADRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 30167 OF 2024
PETITIONER:
CHANDRALEKHA USHA KUMAR,
AGED 48 YEARS,
LEKSHMI SADANAM, KULICKAMPALAM PULIYOOR.P.O,
ALAPUZHA, PIN - 689 511.
BY ADV PRAVEEN K. JOY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE CUSTOMS COMMISSIONER, COCHIN,
CUSTOMS HOUSE, WILLINGTON ISLAND, KOCHI,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682 009.
2 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS CIAL COCHIN,
KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 632 031.
BY ADV V.GIRISHKUMAR, SC, CENTRAL BOARD OF
INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 12.09.2024, ALONG WITH WP(C).30063/2024, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NOS. 30063 AND 30167 OF 2024
3
2024:KER:69665
JUDGMENT
The petitioners are before this Court seeking for provisional
release of certain gold ornaments, which were seized by the Customs
Department, while the petitioners were travelling to Cochin from
Muscat.
2. A statement has been filed by the Standing Counsel
for the Customs Department stating that the claim of the petitioners
can be considered in terms of the Circular referred to in paragraph 14
of the statement filed in W.P(C)No.30063 of 2024 and paragraph 16
of the statement filed in W.P(C)No.30167 of 2024.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners would
submit that the competent authority may be directed to consider the
claim for provisional release in terms of the circulars referred to in
paragraph 14 of the statement filed in W.P(C)No.30063 of 2024 and
paragraph 16 of the statement filed in W.P(C)No.30167 of 2024 within
a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
respondent Department, I am of the view that these writ petitions can
be disposed of with a direction. Paragraph 14 of the statement filed
WP(C) NOS. 30063 AND 30167 OF 2024
2024:KER:69665
W.P(C)No.30063 of 2024 (identical to paragraph 16 of the statement
filed in W.P(C)No.30167 of 2024) reads as follows:-
"14. The petitioner has sought for release of the
scized gold provisionally as interim relief pending disposal
of the Writ Petition. In this regard, the Board, vide Circular
No. 35/2017-Customs dated 16.08.2024 has issued
guidelines for provisional release of seized imported goods
pending adjudication. Vide the above Circular, Board has
directed that the seized imported goods shall be released
provisionally, subject to executing a bond for the value of
the seized goods and a Bank Guarantee or security deposit
to cover the duty amount, amount of fine that may be levied
in lieu of confiscation and amount of penalty that may be
levied at the time of adjudication of the case. However,
drawing attention to the judgement dated 28.07.2016 of the
Hon'ble Madras High Court in Writ Appeal No. 377 of 2016
in the case of Malabar Diamond Gallery Pvt Ltd vs
Additional Director General, DRI, Chennai & Others,
wherein the Hon'ble Court has given sufficient discretion to
the adjudicating authority to deny provisional release of
goods in any case where the goods are smuggled or import
is treated as illegal and in violation of the statutory
provisions, Board has directed that the Adjudicating
Authority may deny provisional release of any goods which
are liable for confiscation under Sec. 111 or Sec. 113 as they
would fall under the definition of prohibited goods, in terms
of Section 2(33) of the Customs Act, 1962."
In the light of the above and taking into consideration of the
submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioners in these
WP(C) NOS. 30063 AND 30167 OF 2024
2024:KER:69665
cases and the learned Standing Counsel for the Customs Department,
these writ petitions will stand disposed of directing the competent
among the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioners for
provisional release of ornaments in the manner set out in paragraph
14 of the statement filed W.P(C)No.30063 of 2024 extracted above
and also keeping in mind the provisions of the circular referred to in
the aforesaid paragraph. The decision shall be taken in the matter as
directed above, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of
a certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
DK
WP(C) NOS. 30063 AND 30167 OF 2024
2024:KER:69665
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30167/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF PASSPORT WITH NO. S4194392
OF THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DETENTION RECEIPT
Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
13.08.2024 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
WP(C) NOS. 30063 AND 30167 OF 2024
2024:KER:69665
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 30063/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF PASSPORT WITH NO. X 6716022
OF THE PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE DETENTION RECEIPT NO.
Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
13.08.2024 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT
