Delhi High Court
Muhammad Nazim vs The Commissioner Of Customs & Ors. on 11 March, 2025
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 11th March, 2025
+ W.P.(C) 3042/2025
MUHAMMAD NAZIM .....Petitioner
Through: Mohammed Ather, Advocate.
(M: 7011359907)
versus
THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing
Counsel with Ms. Suhani Mathur and
Mr. Jai Ahuja, Advocates.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (ORAL)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner- Muhammad
Nazim, under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India inter alia
seeking release of the gold bars, which were detained by the Customs
Department vide detention receipt no. DRINDEL4/07-11-2023/003033
dated 07th November, 2023.
3. The brief background is that the Petitioner is a resident of India and
had arrived at the IGI Airport, New Delhi on 07th November, 2023 from
Saudi Arabia. Two gold bars, weighing 174 grams were seized from the
possession of the Petitioner by the Customs Department. The Petitioner then
moved an application on 14th December 2023 for release of the gold bars to
the Customs Department vide DD No. 11216. Appraisement was effected
and a new DR No. 61225 was issued by the Customs Department.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3042/2025 Page 1 of 4
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:13.03.2025
18:54:43
4. According to the Petitioner, no show cause notice was issued in this
matter, hence this petition seeking release.
5. Ld. Counsel for the Respondent has appeared on advance notice and
submits that a detailed Order in Original dated 29th February, 2024 has
already been passed in the matter. Copy of the same has been handed over to
the ld. Counsel for the Petitioner. The operative portion is extracted
hereunder: -
"In view of the foregoing, I pass the following order:
ORDER
i) I deny the ‘Free Allowance’ if any admissible to the
passenger, Muhammad Nazim for the various acts of
commission and omission;
ii) I declare the passenger, Muhammad Nazim is “an
eligible Passenger” for the purpose of the Notification No.
50/2017-Cus dated 30.06.2017 (as amended) read with
Baggage Rules, 2016 (as amended);
iii) I order absolute confiscation of the “Two gold bars
engraved SUISSE having purity 999 weight 174 grams
valued at Rs.9,84,987” recovered from the Pax
Muhammad Nazim and detained vide DR No.
DR/INDEL4/07.11.2023/003033 dated 07.11.2023 under
Section 111(d), 111(0), 1110) & 111(m) of the Customs
Act, 1962;
iv) I also impose a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac
Only) on the passenger Muhammad Nazim under Section
112(a) & 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962.”
6. Mr. Harpreet Singh, ld. Senior Standing Counsel submits that the
same was communicated via speed post to the Petitioner, however, the
Petitioner’s case is that he never received it. It has been repeatedly
impressed upon the Customs Department and also directed that show cause
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3042/2025 Page 2 of 4
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:13.03.2025
18:54:43
notices, correspondence and orders ought to be communicated through
email, as observed by this Court in Bonanza Enterprises vs. The Assistant
Commissioner of Customs & Anr., 2024: DHC: 9885-DB. The relevant
portion of the said order reads:
“22. The Customs Department ought to in future follow
a system by which in addition to notices by speed post,
registered post or courier, notices are also sent on the
email address which is provided on the letterhead of
the Petitioner or any authorised person. This would
avoid substantial delay and matters proceeding ex-
parte as has happened in the present case.
XXXX
27. In the opinion of this Court, in order to avoid
improper service to parties and to avoid ex-parte
proceedings, it is incumbent that service of notices,
communications and orders ought to be effected even
through email and on the common portal, in addition
to the traditional methods as per Section 153. Let the
present order be communicated to the Chairman,
Central Board of Customs and Indirect Taxes by the
Ld. Standing Counsel (Customs) so that the mandate of
the provision of Section 153(b) and (c) for
communication of notices, orders etc., by email as also
uploading on the Directorate General of Foreign
Trade (DGFT) common portal can henceforth be given
effect to”
7. It is expected that the Customs Department would adhere to the said
directions, in terms of Section 153 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since the
Petitioner has received the order only today from the ld. Counsel for the
Respondent, the Petitioner is given thirty days time to avail of his remedies
in accordance with law.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3042/2025 Page 3 of 4
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:13.03.2025
18:54:43
8. The petition is disposed of. The pending application(s), if any, also
stands disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
JUDGE
MARCH 11, 2025/nd/ck
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 3042/2025 Page 4 of 4
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:13.03.2025
18:54:43