1. The issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition is whether the Customs Act, 1962 and the Baggage Rules, 1998 prohibit foreign tourists entering India from wearing gold ornaments and whether they are bound to declare the gold ornaments worn by them on their person and are not carried in a baggage. Incidentally, the question whether such undeclared gold ornaments worn by a foreign tourist entering India are liable to confiscation also arises for consideration in this writ petition.

2. The petitioner, a Sri Lankan citizen holding Sri Lankan passport No.N 5771160 arrived at Cochin International Airport on 22.2.2014 by Sri Lankan Airlines Flight UL-165 from Colombo. He is also an overseas citizen of India as defined in section 2 (ee) of the Citizenship Act, 1955, he having obtained registration as an overseas citizen of India in terms of section 7A of the Citizenship Act, 1955. On arrival at Cochin Airport, after emigration formalities were completed, he walked through the green channel. The petitioner has averred that after he walked through the green channel, a person in plain clothes who identified himself as an officer of the Customs intercepted him, executed a search on his person and asked him to remove the gold chain he was wearing and declared that he is taking it into custody for contravention of the customs laws. The petitioner has further averred that though very many other passengers were wearing gold ornaments and jewellery, he alone was taken to the Air Intelligence Office Unit within the airport and made to sign on a typed sheet of paper purporting to be a statement made by him under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short). Acopy of the said statement is on record as Ext.P2. The writ petition proceeds to state that he was thereafter served with a copy of Ext.P3 order passed by the second respondent ordering confiscation of the gold chain seized from him and levying a penalty of Rs.5,000/-. It is stated that believing the promise held out by the second respondent that the gold chain will be returned on payment of the penalty, he remitted the sum of Rs.5,000/- levied as penalty with the Exchange Bureau of State Bank of Travancore at Cochin International Airport on 22.2.2014 itself and thereupon, Ext.P4 receipt was issued. In this writ petition, the petitioner challenges Ext.P3 order and seeks the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order and quash Ext.P3 order;

(ii) Declare that confiscation of the gold chain weighing 84 grams (10.5 sovereigns) seized by the respondents from the petitioner on 22.02.2014 at the Cochin International Airport, Nedumbassery under sections 111 (d), (i), (l) and (m) and imposition of penalty under sections 112 (a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable;

(iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to return the gold chain weighing 84 grams (10.5 sovereigns) seized by them from the petitioner on 22.02.2014 at the Cochin International Airport, Nedumbassery;

(iv) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to return the amount covered by Ext.P3 receipt realized from the petitioner as penalty under sections 112 (a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962;

(v) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to re-export the gold chain or collect it on his way back to Sri Lanka.”

3. The principal contention raised in the instant writ petition is that the petitioner has not violated any law in force in India and therefore, the confiscation of the gold chain worn by him and the levy of penalty are illegal, arbitrary and unjust. The petitioner has averred that the gold chain was confiscated on the ground that he has violated Notification No.1