Delhi High Court Orders Economic Offences Wing to Probe Alleged Forgery of Customs Stamps at Airport, Seeks Customs’ Report on Jewellery Disposal and Refund
Isabella Mariam
The High Court of Delhi, Division Bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain directed the Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi Police to investigate allegations of forged Customs stamps on representations submitted by passengers whose gold jewellery had been seized at the Delhi International Airport. The direction followed the Customs Department’s claim that the stamps on the travellers’ submissions were not genuine. The Court also required the Customs authorities to disclose details of how the seized jewellery was disposed of and to explain the calculation of refund after its sale, as the passengers alleged that the items were sold despite their earlier requests for redemption.
The dispute concerns the seizure and subsequent disposal of gold jewellery belonging to travellers arriving from Dubai at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi. The petitioners, comprising a married couple and a family member, alleged that their jewellery was detained by Customs officers on 6 September 2022. They submitted two representations dated 21 March 2023 and 19 July 2023—first requesting that the jewellery not be disposed of and later seeking redemption of the articles.
The petitioners later learned that the jewellery had been disposed of by the Customs Department on 15 May 2023, and their request for a refund was rejected on 26 March 2025 by the Assistant Commissioner (Refund) on grounds of limitation. The petitioners challenged the disposal and refund decision before the Court.
The Customs Department disputed the authenticity of the petitioners’ representations, asserting that the departmental stamps affixed to them were not genuine. The petitioners’ counsel argued that passengers have limited access to submit such representations as the Customs counters are inside the airport.
The Court noted that the case involved questions regarding the disposal process of the seized jewellery, the calculation of refund, and the alleged forgery of Customs stamps on the representations.
The Court observed that “the only way the passengers can enter the airport is by obtaining a pass from the Airport Authority of India, which in the opinion of this Court, is an insufficient access provided to passengers by the Customs Department.”
It stated that “the Customs Department ought to make the Customs Department at the airport, citizen friendly and accessible… the Commissioner of Customs and Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs ought to consider setting up an information counter, where the representations can be submitted by the passengers.”
The Court recorded that “the Customs Department following the decision in Gor Sharian vs. The Commissioner of Customs would in fact be liable to pay the market value of the goods to Petitioner, as the seized goods were disposed of, despite the Petitioner having succeeded in the Order-in-Original dated 1st May, 2023.”
It further stated that “considering the allegations made by the Customs Department that the representation is forged, let an enquiry be conducted by the Delhi Police (Economic Offences Wing) in the Customs Department at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi.”
The Bench also observed that details about the methodology for disposal of the jewellery and the computation of refund required explanation.
The Court directed: “Let the Customs Department file a comprehensive affidavit giving the following details: (i) Methodology adopted for disposal of the gold jewellery; (ii) The amount recovered after disposal of the gold jewellery, and costs, if any; (iii) The manner in which the refund order has been computed and an explanation of the amount payable.”
“Considering the allegations made by the Customs Department that the representation is forged, let an enquiry be conducted by the Delhi Police (Economic Offences Wing) in the Customs Department at the Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi.”
The Bench further directed CBIC to submit an affidavit on establishing information counters at the airport terminals.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Mr. Harsh Trikha, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. Gibran Naushad, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Harsh Singhal, Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Advocates,
Case Title: Puja Jayant & Others vs. Commissioner of Customs, IGI Airport
Neutral Citation: 2025: DHC: 8466 - DB
Case Number: W.P.(C) 13995/2025
Bench: Justice Prathiba M. Singh, Justice Shail Jain
