(1.) THESE eight Writ Petitions are filed by persons carrying their avocation at Dubai and Middle East. Each one of them is holder of a valid Indian passport. The petitioners have averred that Govt. of India by notification bearing no. 171 of 1994 issued on 30. 9. 1994 which came into force on 1st of November 1994, exempted gold when imported into India by an eligible passenger from the customs duty as mentioned in the notification. According to the petitioners, the eligible passenger does not require any licence or permit but he has only to satisfy the conditions laid down under the notification. All the petitioners came to Mumbai from Dubai by Emirates Flight No. 500 on 31st August, 1996 and each one of them brought about 42 gold bars weighing 4900 gms. Upon the landing, each one of them declared that they possess gold of the aforesaid quantity to the proper Officer of the customs channel designated to assess such gold imported. The officers examined the gold and assessed the same for payment of Customs duty as per the notification and after payment of duty in foreign exchange each one of them was issued a duty paid receipt and was allowed the clearance on said gold. It is alleged by the petitioners that they brought this gold for their personal use and they were to appoint one Suresh Jain, a regular broker for the sale of gold who had also come to airport to receive the petitioners. It is the case of the petitioners that they came out of the customs hall and were still at the airport, when they were apprehended by the officers of the Commissioner of Customs and Additional Commissioner of Customs and questioned about the ownership of the gold. The petitioners claimed the gold to be of their ownership. However, they were taken to the office of the second respondent at Marine Lines. Some statement was dictated by the customs officer and the petitioners were forced to write or sign the said statement under the physical assault, mental torture and duress. The petitioners thus were compelled to sign the statement. Thereafter, the officers informed the petitioners that the gold is seized including the duty paid receipt and the passport of the petitioners. The petitioners were released thereafter with instructions that whenever required, the petitioners would be called and the petitioners should attend the office. The petitioners have thereafter come to know that said Suresh Jain who had come to airport to pick up the petitioners, was also arrested and was in fact kept in judicial custody till 2nd September, 1996 on which date, the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate released the said Suresh Jain on bail in the sum of Rs. 50,000/ -.
(2.) IT is asserted by the petitioners that they fully satisfy the explanation describing "eligible passenger". It is submitted that it is not necessary under the notification that the petitioners should prove their ownership of the gold or how they came in possession of the said gold. Referring to several directions given by various authorities, the petitioners have contended that for the purpose of clearance of gold under notification the issue of ownership is thoroughly irrelevant and once the person satisfies the conditions of the notification, the gold has to be cleared. It is further submitted that in the facts of the case, in that the gold after payment of duty in foreign exchange was cleared and as such, after the gold was cleared, it was impermissible for the customs authorities to seize the same. The petitioners have therefore, challenged the said action of the customs authority and prayed that the action of seizure of the gold and the passport by the customs authorities be quashed and the respondents authorities be directed to immediately return to the petitioners the gold seized from them, duty paid receipt for the same and the passport.
(3.) TWO affidavits in reply have been filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Marine Preventive Wing, Mumbai. In the first affidavit, it is contended that after the investigation, adjudication proceedings will follow wherein the petitioners can raise all contentions. It is further stated that the petitioners have suppressed the material facts from the Court. It is thereafter stated as under :