The court ruled that the Baggage Rules, 2016, cannot exceed or restrict the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, particularly regarding personal ornaments worn by travelers.

ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.04.2024 in F.No.OS.No.1569/2023, F.No.OS.No.1570/2023 and F.No.OS.No.1571/2023 passed by the respondent and also to direct the respondent to release the Gold ornaments inappropriately seized by the respondent officials vide seizure/detention file Nos.OS No.1569/2003 AIU B, OS.No.1570/2023 AIU B, and OS.No.1571/2023 AIU B dated 30.12.2023.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are citizens of SriLanka and had come down to Chennai and landed at Chennai International Airport on 30.12.2023 at 03.30 pm along with 3 children. They planned for pilgrimage, to visit various temples in Tamil Nadu, as it is their custom and tradition. The 2^nd petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the 1^st petitioner and she was newly married to one Jeyakanth/son of the 1^st petitioner. The 3^rd petitioner is the daughter of the 1^st petitioner. The details of the family members, who had arrived at Chennai on 30.12.2023, are as follows:

3. While passing the customs, the officials of the respondent had checked their belongings and questioned about their gold ornaments totally weighing about 288 grams. When the enquiry was conducted, the petitioners replied that 2^nd petitioner had got married and going to France after their planned pilgrimage in Tamil Nadu and she has also showed the return ticket to France to the officials.

4. However, the customs officer did not accepted their statements and started to treat the petitioners and the 3 children in an arrogant manner and ordered the 2^nd petitioner to remove her Thaalikodi and hand over the same to the officials. However, she refused and begged the officials not to remove her Thaali since it is a sentimental ornament being a symbol and token of marriage. In spite of her request, the Officials along with her subordinates had forced the 2^nd petitioner and snatched her Mangalya Thalikodi from her neck. Seeing the formidable behavior of the 2^nd respondent, the petitioners 1 and 3 had begged the officer not to do so. But they were man-handled and pushed on the floor. The 3 children started screaming and shivering with fear and at one point of time, the 1^st petitioner had fainted and fell down on the floor.

5. Without bothering about anything, the officials had forced the petitioners to sign on some typed papers, in which it has been mentioned that the ornaments seized from them are not sentimental but smuggled things. However, the petitioners did not agree for the said unfair demand and keep begging them repeatedly. Thereafter, they were not at all provided or permitted any food or even water and they had been kept in a locked room. By 10.00 pm, the customs officer told that their jewels would be returned when they go back from India and with no other option, they agreed to sign the papers. The officials did not allowed them to read the paper even after signing it. Thereafter, the 2^nd petitioner had begged to allow them to exit, but the duty officer told that the Official, who handled this matter had left for home and without her kno