Court No. 10 (1629) 21.07.2026 (JPD 28) (S. Banerjee) Calcutta High Court In the Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Appellate Side WPA 1246 of 2026 Bijay Maurya Vs. The Superintendent of Customs, P & I Siliguri & Ors. Mr. Arnab Chakraborty Ms. Pooja Sah Mr. A. R. Choudhury … for the petitioner Mr. Ratan Banik … for the respondents The petitioner has challenged the Seizure memo cum Seizure List issued under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962 in this writ petition. Petitioner also applied before the concerned authority under Section 110A of the 1962 Act praying for provisional release of the seized articles. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that after the goods are seized, the authority is under a statutory obligation to submit an application before the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate for the purpose of certifying the correctness of the inventory so prepared and also for 2 drawing representative sampling of goods in the presence of the Magistrate. He submit that the Seizure Memo and the Seizure List as well as the entire procedure are liable to be set aside for such statutory non- compliance. Learned advocate further submits that the respondent authorities have also not decided the application filed by the petitioner praying for provisional release of the sized articles. Mr. Banik, learned advocate representing the Customs authorities submits that the goods were seized only on July 4, 2026 and immediately thereafter the concerned authority approached the jurisdictional Magistrate on July 13, 2026 for certification as to the correctness of the inventory so prepared and to draw representative samples of the goods in the presence of the Magistrate. He submits that all the procedures as contemplated under the 1962 Act, more particularly, Section 110(1B) have been strictly followed by the respondent authorities in the case on hand. Faced with such situation, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner 3 submits that for the present the petitioner is seeking a direction upon the respondent authorities to consider the prayer of the petitioner for provisional release of the seized articles. Record reveals that an application seeking the provisional release of the seized articles was submitted before the authorities by a letter dated July 10, 2026 which was received by the office of the concerned authority on the said date. In the light of the submissions made by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and without entering into the merits of the claim made by the petitioner in the prayer for provisional release of seized articles, this writ petition stands disposed of by directing the Joint Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Kolkata, being the respondent no. 2, to consider the application dated July 10, 2026 seeking provisional release of the seized items and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order as expeditiously as possible but positively within a period of three weeks from the receipt of a server 4 copy of this order together with a copy of the application dated July 10, 2026. It will be open to the respondent authorities to approach the concerned jurisdictional Magistrate for passing necessary orders in the light of the provisions contained under Section 110(1B) of the 1962 Act expeditiously. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, upon compliance of requisite formalities. (Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J.)