Power to be exercised in respect of Criminal Proceedings in Court only.

Bhat, J.:-

Petitioners in these cases are Keralites working in West Asia. They returned to Kerala on short leave and arrived at Trivandrum Air Port on different dates. It is reported that substantial quantities of primary gold were seized from them by the Customs Authorities under Sec.110 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short ‘the Act’) and they were duly arrested and produced before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences), Ernakulam and were remanded initially but were released on bail subsequently.‘Their passports and return air tickets were seized as documents which in the opinion of the Customs Authorities will be “useful or relevant to proceedings under the Act”. Petitioners filed separate petitions before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (E.O.), Ernakulam requesting the Court to direct the Customs Authorities to release the passports and return air tickets. Petitions were dismissed on the ground that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to issue such direction. Petitioners have filed these petitions under Sec.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘the Code’) seeking direction to the Customs Authorities to return the passports and the return air tickets.

2. In Crl.M.C. Nos. 386 of 1989 and 393 of 1989 interim orders have been passed to release the passports and air tickets of the petitioners on execution of bond for Rs.50,000 with two solvent sureties for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Collector of Customs, Cochin with the condition that the petitioners shall return to India within five weeks from the date of release of the passport and report before the Collector of Central Excise and Customs.

3. The learned single Judge before whom these cases came up for consideration adjourned the cases to be heard by a Division Bench in view of the importance of the question involved.

4. According to learned counsel for the petitioners the Magistrate has jurisdiction to direct release of the passport and he failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him, and this Court, in exercise of its inherent power should issue such direction. Learned counsel submitted that petitioners are employed abroad and they came to India on short leave and unless they appear before their employers within a reasonable time they will lose their jobs. Learned counsel further submitted that adjudication proceedings under the Act can proceed in their absence as they are represented by counsel and complained that Customs Authorities are dragging on the matter and have refrained from filing complaints before the competent Court against the petitioners for offences under the Act and this is an attempt to harass the petitioners. These averments are denied by learned Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent.

5. The seizures and arrests have been made under the provisions of the Act which has been enacted to preserve and protect’ the economic safety and well-being of the country by preventing illegal import, illegal export and illegal possession of notified goods and to ensure collection of customs duty.

6. Sec.100 confers on proper officer power to search any person if he has reason to believe that the person has secreted about his person, any goods liable to confiscation or any documents relating thereto. The categories of persons who could be so searched are enumerated in Sub-sec(2). Power to search suspected persons in certain other cases is conferred, by Sec.101. Power to screen and X-ray bodies of suspected persons for detecting secreted goods is dealt with in Sec.103. By virtue of Sec.104, if any duly empowered customs officer has reason to believe that any person in India or within the Indian Customs waters has been guilty of an offence punishable under Sec.135, he may arrest such person and shall as soon as may be, inform him of the grounds of such arrest and every person so arrested shall be taken to a Magistrate without unnecessary delay. The Customs Officer has power to r