Bail Granted to Foreign National Held by Customs for Drug Smuggling

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

Bail for foreign national Customs drug smuggling case NDPS Act arrest Section 103 Customs Act
Case Details: Habiob Bedru Omer Versus Customs (2025) 32 Centax 340 (Del.) 

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Amit Sharma, J.
  • S/Shri Arun K. Srivastva with Ashish Sindhu and Ms. Shahina Praveen, Advs., for the Petitioner.
  • S/Shri Jatin Singh, SSC and Ravi Arya, Superintendent Customs, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, a foreign national, arrived in India on a flight from Addis Ababa. While passing through the green channel, the customs officer intercepted him on suspicion of carrying narcotic substances. He was served with a notice under Section 102 of the Customs Act 1962 and Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Suspecting that the petitioner had concealed narcotic substances inside his body, the customs officer issued a notice under Section 103 of the Customs Act 1962 to undergo a body scan. After the petitioner voluntarily agreed, it was found that he has swallowed some capsules containing narcotic substances. During the medical examination, the petitioner was found to have swallowed some capsules. The petitioner was then admitted to the hospital, and he ejected the capsules. The customs officer also recorded the statement of the petitioner under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, and he was arrested and produced before the court. The petitioner contended that he was not under illegal detention as he had consented to go to the hospital for ejecting of the capsules swallowed by him. The customs officer also informed the hospital of the facts of the case and sought their assistance in carrying out the procedure for ejecting the capsules from the petitioner’s body.  

High Court Held

The Delhi High Court held that the petitioner was in the continuous custody of the customs officer from the time of his interception at the airport until his arrest. The “Handing Over” and “Taking Over” memos annexed with the complaint left no doubt that the petitioner’s custody was being transferred from one officer to the other on the basis of the rotational duties. Thus, such custody without any authority and without producing him before the concerned Magistrate or Special Court within 24 hours in accordance with the law was completely illegal. Even if the petitioner was under medication for the procedure being carried out, the same cannot be a ground to keep him in custody. The rights of the petitioner guaranteed under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India were violated. Therefore, he has to be released on bail despite the restrictions provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. 

List Of Cases Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
Govt Notifies Amendment to Customs & Excise Settlement Rules 2025

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

August 2, 2025

No GST on Transfer of Leasehold Rights by GIDC Allottee | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

August 2, 2025

HC Directs Petitioner to Seek Tariff Classification via Representation

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

August 2, 2025

No GST on LWA Fee for Private Jobs | AAR Kerala

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 31, 2025

HC Orders Release of Seized Goods on Bond & Bank Guarantee

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 31, 2025

Paper Wallets for Gloves Classified Under CTH 4823 | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 31, 2025

SCN Waiver via Pre-Printed Form Invalid for Confiscation | Delhi HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 30, 2025

Notional Interest on Deposit Not Taxable | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 30, 2025

CESTAT Remands Classification Dispute of ‘Low Noise Blocker’ for Fresh Review

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 29, 2025

Govt. of J&K is liable to pay GST on hotel accommodation for its security forces to hoteliers: HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 29, 2025