Meghalaya High Court
Date Of Decision: 13.03.2026 vs Union Of India Through The Secretary on 13 March, 2026
Author: H.S.Thangkhiew
Bench: H.S.Thangkhiew
2026:MLHC:178
Serial No.22
Regular List
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
AT SHILLONG
WP(C). No. 77 of 2026
Date of Decision: 13.03.2026
Smti. Kessy Turnia,
Daughter of Shri. Wining Shylla,
Aged about 45 years,
Resident of H.No. 10, Thangrai Village,
South West Khasi Hills District,
Meghalaya - 793114.
...Petitioner
-Versus-
1. Union of India through the Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue,
New Delhi-110001.
2. Assistant Commissioner/ Assistant Director,
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence/Customs
(Preventive), Shillong, Fab's House
Langkyrding Mihngi, Block 2,
Shillong - 793012.
...Respondents
Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice H.S.Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance:
For the Petitioner/Applicant(s) : Mr. P.Yobin, Adv.
Mr. K.V.Kharlyngdoh, Adv.
Ms. S.Mitkong, Adv.
For the Respondent(s) : Dr. N.Mozika, DSGI with
Ms. M.Myrchiang, Adv.
1
2026:MLHC:178
i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No
Law journals etc:
ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No
in press:
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
1. The petitioner, who is stated to be a local trader engaging in dried
areca nuts trade is before this Court challenging the seizure of a consignment
on 06-01-2026 by the respondents, while the same was being transported in
a truck bearing No. ML-12-0072.
2. Mr. P.Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the
petitioner was engaged in lawful trade of transportation of the dried areca
nuts, and the seizure by the respondents is not based on any substantive
information or facts, nor was there any reason to believe on their part that
the same was smuggled. He therefore, prays that appropriate orders be
passed for releasing the goods into his custody, and also from any further
coercive action being taken pursuant to the seizure dated 06-01-2026.
3. Dr. N.Mozika, learned DSGI assisted by Ms. M.Myrchiang, learned
counsel for the respondents, has submitted that the petitioner’s goods were
seized on the basis of source information that the said dried areca nuts had
been loaded from near Bangladesh border. He further submits that as the
petitioner is already participating in the proceedings before the respondents,
2
2026:MLHC:178
the writ petition is premature. He therefore, submits that no interference is
called for at this stage.
4. Mr. P.Yobin, learned counsel for the petitioner, in reply submits that
though the petitioner is participating in the proceedings and an application
under Section 110 (A) of the Customs Act has been filed, but the same has
not been disposed of.
5. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties, and on the limited issue
involved herein, from a perusal of the materials it is seen that the dried areca
nuts amounting to over ₹ 80 lakhs, had been seized from a truck being No.
ML-12-0072, and the reasons for seizure is on charges of illegal importation
to India, in contravention to the Customs Act. However, as it is submitted
that the petitioner is participating in the proceedings, this Court at this stage,
sees that no interference is called for, and as such, the writ petition is closed
with directions that the proceedings be completed expeditiously. It is
however, also directed that the application under Section 110 (A) of the writ
petitioner be given due consideration and be disposed of in accordance with
law, preferably within a period of four weeks from today.
6. Writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.
Judge
Signature Not Verified 3
Digitally signed by
SAMANTHA ANNA LIYA
RYNJAH
Date: 2026.03.13 16:38:08 IST
