Judgement

SUBBA RAO, CJI. : This appeal by certificate raises the question whether the search of the premises of the appellant and the seizure of the articles and the documents found therein was valid.

2. The relevant facts are as follows : The appellant is a mining proprietor and holds several manganese mines in different States. He has also been doing business in many articles apart from being an exporter of manganese ore. On information alleged to have been received to the effect that the appellant was in possession of a large quantity of undeclared gold, the Assistant Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Raipur, issued an authorization under R. 126(L) (2) of the Defence of India (Amendment) Rules, 1963 (Gold Control Rules), hereinafter called the Rules, for searching the premises of the appellant. Pursuant to that authorization, the appellant s premises were searched and as a result of the search gold and other articles, foreign currency and other documents were seized. The appellant filed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the High Court of Bombay (Nagpur Bench) challenging the validity of the said search and the seizure of the articles and documents belonging