$~178 and179 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010247892025 + W.P.(C) 5523/2025 and CM APPL. 25140/2025 MRS VENKATA LAKSHUMMA PEDDAGOLLA .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Harshvir Pratap Sharma, Senior Advocate, Mr. Akul Krishnan & Ms. Sakshi Apurva, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Atul Tripathi, SSC for CBIC with Mr. Akshay Sagar & Mr. Shubham Mishra, Advs. 179 # CNR No. DLHC010321662025 + W.P.(C) 6908/2025 and CM APPL. 31268/2025 MR SUBBA REDDY MIGADA .....Petitioner Through: Dr. Harshvir Pratap Sharma, Senior Advocate, Mr. Akul Krishnan & Ms. Sakshi Apurva, Advs. versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Aakarsh Srivastava, SSC with Mr. Anand Pandey, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN O R D E R % 06.08.2026 1. These two connected writ petitions have been filed challenging the Show Cause Notices dated 03.01.2025 issued by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Office of the Commissioner of Customs, T-3, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, together with the adjudication proceedings arising therefrom. The Petitioners also seek This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2026 at 11:53:41 release of the gold jewellery/personal effects seized by the Customs Authorities. The case of the Petitioners is that they, along with a co- passenger, were detained by the Customs Authorities while carrying gold jewellery weighing 529 grams. 2. The Petitioner in W.P.(C) 5523/2025 claims to be working as a sweeper, whereas the Petitioner in W.P.(C) 6908/2025 claims to be working as a cab driver. 3. The Adjudicating Authority has ordered the confiscation of the gold and imposed penalties. In both these cases, the Petitioners have an efficacious alternative statutory remedy by way of an appeal under the Customs Act, 1962. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that personal jewellery could not have been detained or seized by the Customs Authorities and, therefore, the Customs Authorities lacked jurisdiction to initiate the impugned action. 5. Learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that the invoices produced by the Petitioners in both the cases are forged. 6. These are disputed questions of fact which are appropriately amenable to adjudication by the Appellate Authority. Accordingly, the Petitioners in both these cases are relegated to the statutory remedy of appeal. 7. With the aforesaid observations, both the Writ Petitions stand disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. 8. A photocopy of the order passed today be placed on the record of the connected matter. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 06, 2026/pd/rm This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 11/08/2026 at 11:53:41