Passenger Carrying 250 gm Undeclared Gold Bar through Green Channel Liable to Confiscation: Delhi HC [Read Order]

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court held that a passenger who carried an undeclared 250-gram gold bar through the green channel was liable to confiscation and the court refused to interfere with the customs authorities’ decision to confiscate the gold and impose penalty.

Ruman Khan, the petitioner, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court seeking release of a gold bar weighing 250 grams which was seized by the Customs Department at Terminal-3, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, on 19 July 2023.

The petitioner had arrived from Saudi Arabia and passed through the green channel without declaring the gold bar. He was intercepted by customs officials, his statement was recorded on the same day, and the gold bar was detained.

During the pendency of the writ petition, the High Court initially directed that the gold bar should not be disposed of. The petitioner was later permitted to appear before the customs authorities, a personal hearing was granted, written submissions were filed, and an Order-in-Original dated 14 October 2025 was passed.

By the Order-in-Original, the adjudicating authority declared the petitioner to be an ineligible passenger, ordered absolute confiscation of the gold bar, and imposed a penalty of ₹1,40,000. The authority held that the petitioner had misused the green channel with the intention to smuggle gold and that the gold bar did not qualify as a personal effect under the Baggage Rules, 2016.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the procedure under Section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 had not been properly followed. They also argued that there was an inconsistency regarding the issuance of an oral show cause notice and an alleged waiver of a written notice, and that these lapses justified interference by the Court.

The Customs Department’s counsel argued that the petitioner had deliberately carried the gold bar through the green channel without declaration. They argued that the petitioner had himself requested waiver of a written show cause notice and personal hearing, and that an oral show cause notice had been served. The department relied on the detailed findings recorded in the Order-in-Original, including the petitioner’s travel history, statements, and conduct at the airport.

The Division Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain observed that the petitioner had been granted an adequate opportunity of hearing both during the writ proceedings and before the adjudicating authority. The court observed that a 250-gram gold bar cannot be treated as a personal effect and that the adjudicating authority had correctly applied the law.

The court observed that passing through the green channel without declaring the gold bar clearly showed misuse of the facility and intention to evade customs duty. The court explained that the findings of intent to smuggle and confiscation were supported by the material on record.

The court found no reason to interfere with the Order-in-Original dated 14 October 2025. The court upheld the absolute confiscation of the gold bar along with the penalty imposed on the petitioner and disposed of the writ petition, leaving the petitioner’s other legal remedies open.

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