$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 10045/2025 & CM APPL. 50503/2025 RAZIA BEGUM .....Petitioner Through: Ms.RichaKumari&MrPawan,Advs.

versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Senior Standing Counsel with Ms. Drishti Rawal, Mr. Abhay Nair, Mr. Mayur Goyal & Mr. Sarthak Srivastava, Advs.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

O R D E R

% 18.12.2025

1. The hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking quashing of the seizure of goods effected pursuant to Detention Receipt No. 4061 (old detention receipt) dated 23rd March,2024 and Detention Receipt No. 15009 (issued after appraisement) dated 26th March ,2024.

3. Further the Petitioner also seeks to set aside Order -in -Original No.2033/003812/17.02.2024/WH/2024-25 dated 6th November 2024

4. A brief background of the petitioner's case is that she was travelling from Saudi Arabia to India on 23rd March, 2023 after completing her pilgrimage/Umrah at Mecca. Upon her arrival at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, two gold bangles weighing 117 grams which she was wearing, were seized by the Customs Department, vide Detention Receiptdated 23rd March,2024.Thereafter,thedetained jewellery was apprised in the presence of the Petitioner.

5. The present petition has been disposed of vide detailed Judgement dated 16^th July, 2025. The operative portion of the said order reads as under :

“xxx xxx xxx

17. Thus,itisnowsettled thatthe usedjewellery worn by the passenger would fall within the ambit of personal effects in terms of the Rules, which would be exempt from detention by the Customs Department. In view of the above and considering the facts of the case, it is clearthat the detained jewellery arethepersonal effects of the Petitioner. Accordingly, the detained jewellery would be liable to be released.

18. Under such circumstances,the detention of the Petitioner’s jewellery is not tenable. Accordingly, the said detention is set aside. The detained jewellery shall be released to the Petitioner within a period of two weeks. The Petitioner shall appear before the Customs Department on 1st August 2025, at 11.30 am and may collect the detained jewellery through an Authorised Representative, in which case, the detained jewellery shallbereleasedafterreceivingaproperemailfromthe Petitioner or some form of communication that the Petitioner has no objection to the same being released to the concerned Authorised Representative. The Petitioner shall pay the warehousing charges.

19. If any amount has been paid by the Petitioner for filing of the appeal by way of pre-deposit, the adjustment of the said amount shall be given qua the warehousing charges and only the remaining amount shall be paid by the Petitioner in the form of warehousing charges. The Order-in-Original is thus set aside.

20. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in above terms. All pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.”

6. An application has been moved seeking compliance of the said order. The initial stand of the Customs Department was that an SLP is being filed against this order. However, till date, no SLP has been filed. Accordingly, let the order dated 16^th July, 2025 be given effect to.

7. The release of the goods shall be subject to the outcome of the SLP.

8. Foraperiodofsixmonths,thePetitionershallnotdisposeofthe goods. 9. Warehousing charges post 16^th July, 2025 shall not be liable to be paid. 10. The Petitioner shall appear before the Customs Department on 15^th January, 2026 at 11:00 AM in person or through an Authorised Representative, in which case, a proper email from the Petitioner or some form of communication to be sent to the Customs Department that the Petitioner has authorised the concerned Authorised Representative to appear on behalf of the Petitioner. The Petitioner shall then appear virtually for the purposes o