Kerala HC Directs Customs to Release Seized Vehicle

Shabin S. Vs Joint Commissioner of Customs (Kerala High Court)

Introduction: In the matter of Shabin S. vs. Joint Commissioner of Customs, the Kerala High Court addressed the issue of the provisional release of a seized vehicle under section 110A of the Customs Act. The petitioner sought various reliefs, including the release of the vehicle and other confiscated items.

Detailed Analysis: Through Ext.P7 order in the original dated 05.09.2023, the court granted several reliefs to the petitioner, including the release of a seized car with registration number KL 16 E 5995 to Shri. Shabin S, the owner of the car. However, despite the court’s order, the petitioner’s seized car had not been returned to him.

In response to this situation, the Kerala High Court directed respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to immediately return the seized vehicle to the petitioner.

Conclusion: The Kerala High Court’s directive in the case of Shabin S. vs. Joint Commissioner of Customs highlights the importance of enforcing court orders promptly. The court ordered the Customs authorities to release the seized vehicle to the petitioner following the reliefs granted in Ext.P7 order. This ruling ensures the timely provision of justice and the execution of court orders.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KERALA HIGH COURT

1. The present Writ Petition has been filed under the Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following prayers:-

“1. Call for the entire records relating to Ext.P1 to P4 from the respondents;

2. Quash Ext P4 order of 2^nd respondent by a writ of certiorari or any other writ, order of direction;

3. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order of direction to the 2nd respondent to provisionally release vehicle bearing Reg.No.KL-16-E-5995 kept in the police station premise of the 3^rd respondent U/s 110A of the Customs Act to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible within a time limit as fixed by this Hon’ble Court;

4. Exempt the petitioner from producing the English translation of vernacular documents produced along with the writ petition;

5. Such other relief that this Honorable court may deem fit to render justice to the petitioner.”

2. Vide Ext.P7 order in original dated 05.09.2023, following reliefs have been granted to the petitioner:-

“1. I order release of two Jack Daniel’s old No.7 brand whiskey to Shri. Aseem, S/o. Nazarudeen, Puliyarailagathu Veedu, Neellanadu.P.O, Thiruvananthapuram–695606;

2. I order absolute confiscation of one Silver Olk Vodka valued at Rs.1500/- to Shri. Aseem, S/o. Nazarudeen, Puliyarailagathu Veedu, Neellanadu. P.O, Thiruvananthapuram – 695606 seized under Section 111(d) and 111 (I) of the Customs Act, 1962;

3. I order release of the seized car bearing registration number KL 16 E 5995 to Shri. Shabin S, S/o. Shaji, Singapore Palace, Korani, Edakkode, Thiruvananthapuram – 695104, the owner of the car;

4. I order release of one mobile phone (Apple I–Phone–II) No. 8111834184 SIM No. 8991950912997346603U to Shri. Najam S.S, S/o. Sirajudeen, Noufiya Manzil, Ambalam Mukku, Nellanad.P.O, Vamanapuram, Thiruvananthapuram – 695606;

5. I order release of Indian Rupees of 19,500/- and 2010 UAE Dirham equivalent to Indian Rupees 46,029/- to Shri. Najam S.S, S/o. Sirajudeen, Noufiya Manzil, Ambalam Mukku, Nellanad.P.O, Vamanapuram, Thiruvananthapuram – 695606;

6. I drop the penalty proposed under sections 115 and 112(B) of the Customs Act, 1962 on to Shri. Aseem, S/o. Nazarudeen, Puliyarailagathu Veedu, Neellanadu. P.O, Thiruvananthapuram – 695606;

7. I drop the penalty proposed under sections 112(b) and 114 on to Shri. Najam S.S, S/o. Sirajudeen, Noufiya Manzil, Ambalam Mukku, Nellanad.P.O, Vamanapuram, Thiruvananthapuram – 695606;

8. I drop the penalty proposed under section112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 on to Shri. Shabin S, S/o. Shaji, Singapore Palace, Korani, Edakkode, Thiruvananthapuram – 695104.”

3. In view of the reliefs granted to the petitioner, nothing is survived in this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that despite the aforesaid Ext.P7 order, the petitioner’s seized car has not been given to him.

4. In view thereof, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are directed to give back the vehicle to the petitioner forthwith.

5. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition is disposed of.