The Delhi High Court has ruled that the detention of two gold chains by the Customs Department is legally impermissible, as no show cause notice was issued even after the expiry of the one-year statutory period under Section 110 of the Customs Act. The Court ordered immediate release of the jewellery to the petitioner, an Uzbekistan national.
The Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta cited binding precedents and reaffirmed that used personal jewellery worn by a passenger falls under the ambit of “personal effects” as per the Baggage Rules, 2016, and thus cannot be arbitrarily detained.
The petitioner, a citizen of Uzbekistan, had approached the Court seeking the release of the 199-gram gold jewellery that was seized on March 24, 2023. He asserted that the chains were his personal jewellery and expressed willingness to re-export them, if necessary.
During the hearing conducted via hybrid mode, the petitioner’s counsel submitted that neither a show cause notice had been issued nor any formal order passed regarding the detained goods. The Customs Department, in response, claimed that the petitioner failed to appear for a scheduled hearing in May 2025.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta observed that the jewellery appeared to be used personal effects, and cited landmark judgments including Pushpa Lekhumal Tolani [(2017) 16 SCC 93] and Saba Simran v. Union of India (2024), which clarified that used personal jewellery worn by passengers qualifies as “personal effects” under the Baggage Rules, 2016, and is exempt from detention.
The Court also referred to Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, which mandates that a show cause notice must be issued within six months of detention, extendable by another six months. In this case, over a year had elapsed without any such notice being issued, thereby rendering the detention illegal.
Accordingly, the Court directed Customs to release the two gold chains to the petitioner for re-export, after due verification. The jewellery may also be collected by an authorised representative upon submission of the petitioner’s written consent. However, the petitioner is required to pay storage or warehousing charges accrued since the date of detention.
Case Details
Case Title: Alisher Ochilov Versus Commissioner Of Customs
Case No.: W.P.(C) 8058/2025
Date: 23rd July, 20205
Counsel For Petitioner: Aman Yadav
Counsel For Respondent: Harpreet Singh
