Farida Aliyeva Vs Commissioner of Customs (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held the gold jewellery in the form of ornaments worn by the foreign tourist would not qualify for seizure under Rule 3 of the Baggage Rules, 2016. Thus, the detention receipt is accordingly quashed.
Facts- The Petitioner is an Azerbaijan national who travelled from Baku to Delhi on 4th November, 2024 as a tourist by Indigo flight. As per the Petitioner, she was wearing 18 carat gold jewellery consisting of a necklace and a bracelet weighing 0.178 gms which was seized by the Customs officials in the arrival hall of T-3 of the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi.
According to her, she was made to remove the 18-carat gold jewellery worn by her and such jewellery was her personal gold jewellery. It is the case of the Petitioner that such personal jewellery would not qualify for seizure under Rule 3 of the Baggage Rules, 2016 framed u/s. 79 of the Customs Act, 1962.
Conclusion- Held that personal effects would be exempt especially if they are in the form of ornaments in case of a foreigner. Thus, the 18 carat gold jewellery which was being worn by the tourist who was travelling from Azerbaijan to India, the same would not be liable to be seized and the detention receipt is accordingly quashed. The Petitioner shall personally visit the Customs warehouse for release of the said goods. It is made clear that Petitioner shall not indulge in sale of the said articles and shall carry back the same with her to the country of origin.
