Legal principle

Jewellery that is bona fide in personal use by a traveller forms part of 'personal effects' under the Baggage Rules and must not be detained routinely, and a preprinted waiver form cannot substitute for a valid oral show cause notice under Section 124 of the Customs Act, the right to a personal hearing being incapable of waiver.

Court decision

The Court recorded the Department's stated mechanisms and issued further directions in favour of travellers: Customs officials are to be sensitised so that old, worn or used jewellery of even Indian travellers is not routinely detained; personal effects including jewellery of foreign-origin travellers declared in the 'Red Channel' with an undertaking to re-export shall not be detained; adjudicating orders must be communicated by email/WhatsApp with a 90-day (60+30) challenge window and appellate forum contact details; even if SCN notice is waived, notice of personal hearing must be given as the right to personal hearing cannot be waived under Section 124. If the Baggage Rules are not amended by the next date, an SOP covering the highlighted issues (including standard-form Section 108 statements and simplified appraisal/disposal of detained goods) must be filed. The Revision Authority was directed to decide the petitioner's case within one month, with the revision order placed before the Court; further affidavit and draft SOP were directed, and the part-heard matter was listed for 19 May 2025.

Facts

Qamar Jahan is the lead matter in a bunch of over 30 writ petitions before the Delhi High Court concerning detention of goods by Customs from tourists and travellers, of both Indian and foreign origin, arriving in India. Travellers, including Indian citizens returning from abroad, were being intercepted at airports and items they were wearing, including jewellery, were being detained. By an earlier order dated 13 January 2025, the Court found the Baggage Rules, 2016 outdated and archaic given the rise in gold prices and referred them to the Chairman, CBIC for reconsideration, with a report to be filed. In the present hearing, the Department placed its mechanisms before the Court (detailed detention receipts with images, abolition of preprinted waiver forms, notice of personal hearing via WhatsApp/email) and sought further time to amend the Baggage Rules. The petitioner's own revision was pending, and the Court directed the Revision Authority to decide it within one month.

Key provisions

• Section 124, Customs Act, 1962 — Issue of show cause notice before confiscation of goods etc
• Section 101, Customs Act, 1962 — Power to search suspected persons in certain other cases
• Rule 3, Baggage Rules, 2016 — Passenger arriving from countries other than Nepal, Bhutan or Myanmar
• Section 102, Customs Act, 1962 — Persons to be searched may require to be taken before gazetted officer of customs or magistrate
• Section 79, Customs Act, 1962 — Bona fide baggage exempted from duty