Factual Dispute on Custody Legal or Proper in Gold Smuggling Case not for Writ Jurisdiction: Telangana HC Directs to Remedy under BNSS [Read Order]

The Telangana High Court has declined to entertain a writ petition challenging the custody of the petitioner’s husband in a gold smuggling case, ruling that disputed questions of fact regarding the legality or propriety of the custody are not suitable for adjudication in writ jurisdiction.

The petitioner, Sangeeta Jain alleged that her husband was taken into custody at Rajiv Gandhi International Airport, Hyderabad, on 21 July 2025, based on a confessional statement by the main accused, Ms. Harshavardini Ranya, who had been arrested earlier at Kempegowda International Airport, Bengaluru, for smuggling gold bars into India.

She claimed that the statements from her husband were forcibly obtained and that the action violated his constitutional rights under Articles 21 and 300-A. She sought his immediate release and production of any evidence, including his mobile phone records and SIM card, before the Court.

Understanding Common Mode of Tax Evasion with Practical Scenarios, Click Here

The bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice S. Chalapathi Rao noted that the petitioner’s husband had been named as a co-accused in the ongoing investigation.

The High Court ruled that it was improper for it to decide such disputed facts in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 after taking into account the allegations, the facts surrounding his apprehension, and the disagreements over the legitimacy of custody.

The court dismissed the writ petition. It instructed the petitioner to take appropriate remedies under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 or other applicable laws.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates