2023 (12) TMI 18 - HC - Customs

Maintainability of Public Interest Litigation - seizure of jewellery / ornaments worth Rs. 50,000/- Constitutional validity of Circular instruction No. 22/2022-Customs dated 06th September, 2022 and Circular instruction No. 27/2021-Customs dated 03rd December, 2021 - mandating compulsory disposal and sale to RBI of all gold ornaments/ jewellery within three months from the date of seizure - ultra vires Section 150, 125 and 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 and violative of Articles 14, 21, 31 and 300A of the Constitution of India. HELD THAT - This Court is of the view that the present petition is not maintainable as it is a settled principle of law that an aggrieved person must approach the Court. The standing doctrine characteristic is that a potential litigant must be injured by the action it is challenging. In the opinion of this Court, the petitioner is a stranger, who has not been adversely affected by either of the impugned Circular Instructions as none of his ornaments or articles or jewellery items have been seized. Undoubtedly, the rule of locus standi is relaxed in case of public interest litigation, but that is to be done only to ensure that the poor or socially and economically backward or persons with disability are not denied their rights. In a public interest case, there need be no litigant, if a problem is deemed by the Court as worthy of attention. The concept of public interest litigation, as stated hereinabove, is linked to the enforcement of the social and economical rights in India. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has filed the present Public Interest Litigation as jewellery / ornaments worth as low as Rs. 50,000 can be seized at the airport and sold immediately - This Court is of the view that any individual who owns gold jewellery/ ornaments and who travels by air is not economically or socially backward and can approach the Courts directly. The present petition which has been filed as Public Interest Litigation is held to be non-maintainable and the same is dismissed alongwith pending application.

Summary

Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are the quashing of Circular instructions mandating disposal and sale of seized gold ornaments, differentiation between types of gold items, locus standi in public interest litigation, and the maintainability of the petition.

Quashing of Circular Instructions:
The petitioner sought to quash Circular instructions mandating the disposal and sale of all gold ornaments within three months from the date of seizure, alleging it to be ultra vires the Customs Act and violative of constitutional provisions. The petitioner argued that the Instructions failed to differentiate between gold items with emotional value and other forms of gold, leading to irreparable loss to rightful owners. Additionally, the Instructions were criticized for not distinguishing between 'seized' and 'confiscated' gold items.

Locus Standi in Public Interest Litigation:
The Court deliberated on the principle of locus standi in public interest litigation, emphasizing that an aggrieved person must approach the Court, and the petitioner, not directly impacted by the Circular Instructions, lacked standing. While acknowledging the relaxation of locus standi in public interest cases to protect the marginalized, the Court highlighted the need for a genuine problem affecting the disadvantaged for such litigation. Citing the importance of public interest litigation in ensuring access to justice for the underprivileged, the Court referred to previous judgments emphasizing justice for all segments of society.

Maintainability of the Petition:
The Court held that the petitioner, who owned gold ornaments and traveled by air, did not fall under the socially or economically backward category, concluding that the petition filed as a Public Interest Litigation was non-maintainable. Consequently, the petition was dismissed along with any pending applications.