THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJANA CRIMINAL PETITION No.4567 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed seeking the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in HQPOR No.29 of 2019-customs preventive on the file of the learned Special Judge for Economic Offences, Nampally, Hyderabad.

2. The brief facts of the case are that one Mr. Feroz Khan, an Indian passport holder, arrived in Hyderabad from Dubai on May 2, 2019, and was intercepted by Customs Officers at Rajiv Gandhi International Airport on suspicion of smuggling. His baggage was scanned, revealing suspicious metallic objects concealed within the trolley bag's inner frame. Upon further examination, officers discovered twelve silver-coated wires, later confirmed by an official valuer to be 24-carat gold, weighing 1110.750 grams and valued at Rs. 34,97,751/-.

3. During interrogation, Mr. Khan claimed the bag belonged to Mr. Jabri, a friend of his brother in Dubai, and that he had agreed to transport it to Hyderabad in exchange for a return ticket. He stated that he was instructed to hand over the bag to Mr. Syed Mohammed upon arrival. Customs officers discreetly followed Mr. Khan to the exit and apprehended Mr. Mohammed as he came to receive the bag. Upon questioning, Mr. Mohammed admitted his role, explaining that he had coordinated the smuggling with Mr. Jabri to profit from selling the gold in India.

4. Both individuals were arrested under Section 104 of the Customs Act, 1962, and remanded to judicial custody before being released on bail with conditions. The seized gold was confiscated, and legal proceedings were initiated. However, subsequent inquiries under the Right to Information Act confirmed that the authorities decided not to pursue prosecution, citing Board Circular No.12/2022-Customs.

Challenging the same, the present criminal petition is filed.

5. Heard Sri K. Satish Chakravarthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner as well as Sri Dominic Fernandes, learned Standing Counsel for CBIC appearing on behalf of the respondent.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per the reply received through the Right to Information (RTI) Act, the Customs authorities clearly stated that prosecution would not be launched in the case, citing Board Circular No.12/2022-Customs. Since the confiscated gold was absolutely seized and no further legal or penal proceedings remain pending against the petitioner, he contended that continuing the case before the Court would amount to an abuse of process. He further submitted that the presence of the petitioner was no longer required for any investigation or prosecution, and thus requested the Court to quash the proceedings against the petitioner by allowing this criminal petition.

7. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submitted that, although there is a circular, the respondent authority has the power to impose a penalty, which has already been imposed in the amount of Rs.3,50,000/-. Therefore, he prayed that the Court quash the proceedings against the petitioner only to the extent of the prosecution, without affecting the penalty imposed by the respondent authority.

8. In the light of the submissions made by both the learned counsel and a perusal of the material available on record, it is evident that the Customs Officers discovered twelve silver-coated wires, later confirmed by an official valuer to be 24-carat gold, weighing 1110.750 grams and valued at Rs. 34,97,751/-. As per Circular No.12/2022-Customs issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC), the threshold for launching prosecution in baggage- related smuggling cases is Rs.50,00,000/- or more. Since the value of the seized gold is below this threshold, no prosecution can be initiated against the petitioner.

9. The relevant portion of Circular No.12/2022-Customs, dated 16.08.2022, held as under:

"Cases involving unauthorized importation in baggage, where the