In a recent ruling, the Madras High Court criticized the Chennai Customs Department for unlawfully seizing gold jewelry from a Sri Lankan citizen, including her Thaalikodi ( mangalsutra ), and directed the customs authorities to return the jewelry. The court ordered an inquiry into the misconduct of the seizing officer and explained that worn jewelry does not qualify as baggage under customs laws.
Thanushika, a Sri Lankan national, filed a writ petition challenging the confiscation order issued by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. The petitioner arrived at Chennai International Airport on 30.12.2023 with her mother-in-law and sister-in-law after her marriage in India. Customs officials detained her for 12 hours, forcibly removed her mangalsutra, and seized gold jewelry totaling 288 grams, citing Baggage Rules, 2016.
Complete Supreme Court Judgment on GST from 2017 to 2024 with Free E-Book Access, Click here
The customs department claimed that the petitioner had violated baggage regulations by not declaring the gold and attempting to smuggle it through the green channel. The department further argued that under the Customs Act, 1962, foreign nationals are not entitled to carry excessive gold without declaration.
The petitioner countered that worn jewelry is not baggage and therefore does not fall under the purview of the Baggage Rules, 2016. The counsel explained that the Thaalikodi (mangalsutra) holds deep cultural and religious significance, and its forceful removal by customs officers was a violation of her dignity and rights.
Complete Supreme Court Judgment on GST from 2017 to 2024 with Free E-Book Access, Click here
A single bench led by Justice Krishnan Ramasamy observed that the confiscation was illegal and based on false documentation. The court held that the Baggage Rules, 2016, could not override the Customs Act, which does not classify worn jewelry as baggage. The court condemned the disrespectful treatment of the petitioner and her family, stating that customs officials must respect religious customs when conducting searches.
The court quashed the confiscation order and directed the immediate return of the seized gold within seven days. The court ordered an inquiry against the customs officer, S. Mythili, and directed the Principal Chief Commissioner of Customs ( Tamil Nadu & Puducherry ) to take disciplinary action. The matter was also referred to the Department of Personnel & Training (IRS-Customs) for further investigation.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
