Fariyad Alam Vs Union of India (Patna High Court)
Patna High Court held that seizure memo without recording mandatory ‘reason to believe’ as required under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 is invalid and bad-in-law. Accordingly, order of confiscation is liable to be quashed.
Facts- The petitioner in this case is challenging the Seizure Memo dated 21.04.2023 whereby and whereunder 35 bags of wheat containing 55 Kgs each have been seized by one Sunil Dutt Gaurola, Assistant Sub-Inspector, 47 Battalion, Shashtra Seema Bal, Bihar and handed over to the Assistant Commandant ‘A’ COY, 47th Battalion, SSB, Bihar. The petitioner has also prayed for the provisional release of the seized vehicle along with the consignment of 35 bags of wheats.
Conclusion- It has been held by this Court in several judicial pronouncements that the ‘reason to believe’ as required under Section 110 of the Act of 1962 is a sine quo non for effecting the seizure and it must be recorded by the Seizing Officer. Since there is no contest on this point that the seizure memo does not contain any ‘reason to believe’, we have no hesitation in quashing the seizure memo. The seizure memos are, therefore, quashed as far as the same relates to the wheats of 35 bags containing 55 Kgs each.
