Madras High Court Stays Single Judge Order Directing Enquiry Against Customs Officers For Seizing 'Thalikodi' Of Newly Married Woman

The division bench of Justice SS Sundar and Justice C Saravanan stayed the order of Justice Krishnan Ramasamy on an appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Chennai.

The respondent (original petitioner) had approached the court after the customs officer forcefully removed the gold worn by her and her family members when they arrived at the Chennai airport for a pilgrimage. The respondent, a Srilankan national, also informed the court that though she had informed the customs officer that it was her own jewellery and that she had recently gotten married, the authorities did not accept the statement and removed her thali arrogantly. She had also claimed that the authorities mistreated her and her family.

The single judge, emphasising the importance of Thali in Hindu culture, said that the officers' acts amounted to the annihilation of the Hindu customs and culture of the country. The judge also remarked that the officer seemed to have worked with an ulterior motive to distract the attention of other officers for the benefit of someone else. The single judge had thus directed the Principal Chief Commissioner of Customs (Tamil Nadu and Puducherry) to conduct an inquiry against the officer and take action as per law. The court also directed the confiscated goods to be returned.

In its appeal, the authority argued that the single judge had failed to consider that as per the Baggage Rules 2016, personal items do not include gold in any form. It was argued that the single judge was carried away with emotion that the item was a thali. The Principal Chief Commissioner of Customs argued that if such a view was accepted, any person could smuggle gold on their person and the existing laws against gold import would lose significance.

The court admitted the writ appeal and stayed the order of the single judge.

Case Title: The Principal Commissioner of Customs and Another v. Thanushika

Case No: WA 413 of 2025