KESSY TURNIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who is stated to be a local trader engaging in dried areca nuts trade is before this Court challenging the seizure of a consignment on 6/1/2026 by the respondents, while the same was being transported in a truck bearing No. ML-12-0072.

(2.) Mr. P.Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner was engaged in lawful trade of transportation of the dried areca nuts, and the seizure by the respondents is not based on any substantive information or facts, nor was there any reason to believe on their part that the same was smuggled. He therefore, prays that appropriate orders be passed for releasing the goods into his custody, and also from any further coercive action being taken pursuant to the seizure dtd. 6/1/2026.

(3.) Dr. N.Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M.Myrchiang, learned counsel for the respondents, has submitted that the petitioner's goods were seized on the basis of source information that the said dried areca nuts had been loaded from near Bangladesh border. He further submits that as the petitioner is already participating in the proceedings before the respondents, the writ petition is premature. He therefore, submits that no interference is called for at this stage.