AGARTALA, India, Feb. 19 -- Tripura High Court issued the following order/judgement on Jan. 19:
[1] Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.
[2] This present writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs: "In the premises aforesaid, it is therefore prayed that Your Lordships may be pleased to consider the above facts, call for the records, issue a rule calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why impugned letter issued by the Respondent No.3 dated 19.04.2013 shall not be set aside and further as to why the Respondent authorities shall not be directed either to return the said seized 9 (nine) pieces of gold (24 karat) weighing 194.414 gms in same condition or alternatively make payment of the value of the gold of same purity and weight at current market price along with cost and adequate compensation to the petitioner for the illegal act of the Customs Authority as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper in the ends of justice to the poor and old petitioner and upon such cause or causes that may be shown hearing the parties perusing the records, and further be pleased to make the rule absolute and/or pass any other order or orders as Your Lordship deem fit and proper.
[3] Brief fact of the case is that, on 22.10.2003 while petitioner's son was travelling by a passenger bus bearing Registration No. TR-03-A-3790 from Barpathari to Udaipur with the 6(six) pieces of gold (24 carat) accompanied with list of ornaments to be manufactured by goldsmiths at Udaipur, the Customs personnel seized the said gold thereafter, the same was released. Further, on 13.01.2005 when the petitioner's son proceeded from Barpathari to Udaipur by a passenger bus bearing Registration No. TR-03-1259 with said 9 pieces of gold (24 Karat) weighing 194.414 gms (6 pieces weighing 111.1725 gms + 3 pieces weighing 83.2415 gms) accompanied with the list of the ornaments to be manufactured by the goldsmith of Udaipur as per order of the Customer, the said gold was also seized but subsequently released as per order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) vide his order dated 02.01.2013. After that, on 19.04.2013, the petitioner was asked to apply for receiving sale proceeds. Being aggrieved by the action of the respondent No.3, the petitioner herein preferred this appeal.
[4] Learned counsel Mr. T. K Deb, appearing for the petitioner submits before this Court that the respondent- customs official has illegally seized the gold from the petitioner, and thereafter, petitioner preferred appeal but subsequently released as per order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal) vide his order dated: 02.01.2013. He further submits that the action of the Respondent No. 3, offering the petitioner the value of the gold as on 19.04.2013, and asking the petitioner to apply for receiving the sale proceeds even after passing the order of the Hon'ble Commissioner (Appeal) Guwahati, is an attempt to total disregard and disrespect . He, therefore prayed before this Court to allow his petition.
[5] Heard and perused the evidences of record. [6] According to this Court, this present writ petition is hit by laches and there is no reasonable explanation given in this regard. However, in pursuance of the intimation dated 19.04.2013, the petitioner to approach the respondent authorities to receive the sale proceed of Rs. 1,91, 877/- and this Court is of the view that the petitioner is always at liberty to approach the concerned respondents and receive the sale proceed of the gold.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x0ZdZENGr9snHfHea7AnTlKfJXB9oxwHYRSG47mqNqy5&caseno=WP(C)/169/2025&cCode=1&cino=TRHC010004782025&state_code=20&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
