Excessive Discretion of Customs Officials: Delhi High Court Calls for Review of Baggage Rules to Prevent Harassment of Travelers

Delhi High Court: In a petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, challenging the orders dated 06-02-2024 and 23-09-2024, passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs and the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), respectively, the Division Bench of Prathiba M. Singh* and Dharmesh Sharma, JJ., stated that the Baggage Rules, 2016, (‘Baggage Rules’) were required to be re-looked by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (‘CBIC’) and a policy decision was required to be taken by the Government of India to ensure that there was no harassment of genuine tourists and travellers, and also to ensure that illegal smuggling of gold was properly curbed.

It is seen by this Court in a number of writ petitions, that even small quantities of jewellery is sometimes seized by the Customs Department if the passenger is walking through the green channel – which is for passengers not having any dutiable or prohibited goods. Moreover, the Court is of the view that the Baggage Rules may also require a re-look, considering the market rate of gold at present, where forty grams of gold would be costing much more the value cap of Rs. 1,00,000/- prescribed under Rule 5 of Baggage Rules. With the maximum limit of Rs.1,00,000/-, the gold that could be purchased may only be around 15 grams.

While, there is no doubt that any illegal smuggling of gold deserves to be curbed, at the same time, bona-fidely and genuine tourists/travellers, including people from Indian Origin such as the OCI Cardholders, PIOs etc., could be travelling for social engagements in India or social events such as marriages etc., with gold, which could be of a much higher value than the permissible limits. Such tourists and travellers ought not to be expected to
file detailed declarations, which could make the entire process of entering India and exiting from airports extremely unfriendly or onerous.

The Customs Officials in such cases would also be vested with too much arbitrary power and discretion, which may result in harassment of genuine passengers.

The matter would next be listed on 27-03-2023.

Advocates who appeared in this case:

For the Petitioner: Ashish Panday, Advocate.

For the Respondents: Jagdish Chandra, CGSC-UOI with Shubham Kumar Mishra,
Advocate, Shubham Tyagi, SSC-CBIC with Sunil Kumar, Deputy Commissioner, Sunil
Kumar, ACS, Mratyunjay Singh Chauhan, ASC, Harpreet Singh, Senior Standing Counsel
along with Suhani Mathur and Shivang Chawla, Advocates