Kochi: A long-brewing turf war between the Customs Department and the Kerala Police has erupted into a full-fledged legal showdown, with the Customs Preventive Division accusing the state police of illegal searches, harassment of passengers, and sabotaging sensitive gold-smuggling investigations at the Calicut International Airport.

In 2024, former MLA P V Anvar levelled allegations of nexus between Kerala police and gold smuggling mafia. In response, Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan came up with an elaborate list of gold seizures by police. In a letter to the former Governor Arif Mohammed Khan, he even said that there was laxity on the part of the Customs department in checking smuggling of gold in airports and even hinted that Kerala police made up for Customs department's laxity.

The latest controversy has surfaced after the Customs Preventive Division in Kozhikode filed sharply worded counter-affidavits at the High Court in response to two petitions submitted by Ibrahim and PM Muhammed of Kasaragod, both of whom claim that their personal belongings, including gold ornaments, were unlawfully seized by the police without any criminal cases being registered.

According to the petitions, Ibrahim arrived at the Calicut International Airport from Bahrain on October 22, 2024. After completing all mandatory immigration and customs formalities and exiting through the green channel, he was received by his friend, Muhammed. Moments after they exited the airport premises, they were stopped by police officers. The police seized Ibrahim’s gold chain weighing 101.3 grams, his mobile phone and his Indian passport. From Muhammed, the police seized a 185.5-gram gold chain, a mobile phone and ₹12,000 in cash.

Both men asserted that these items were their personal belongings, used by themselves and their families, and that no enforcement agency, including the Customs Department, had accused them of wrongdoing. When they approached the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court in Manjeri later seeking the return of their belongings, the court refused their plea solely on the ground that they could not produce purchase bills for the gold.

Challenging the Magistrate’s refusal, Ibrahim and Muhammed approached the High Court arguing that the police acted entirely without jurisdiction, especially since both had already been cleared by Customs and no objections were raised even after the department received court notice. They contended that holding their belongings without initiating any investigation or filing any case amounted to an unconstitutional deprivation of property, violating their right under Article 300A of the Constitution.

With no rival claimants, no allegations of illegal activity and no proceedings initiated under any law, the petitioners sought to overturn the Magistrate’s order and reclaim their belongings, including crucial documents such as passports.

The Customs Department, in its counter-affidavits filed by deputy commissioner Syam Nath S, supported the petitioners’ contention regarding jurisdiction, making it clear that the 'entire premises of the airport and area around the airport’ is a designated ‘Customs Area’ falling within the exclusive authority of the Union Government. It said that only Customs officers are empowered under the Customs Act, 1962 to inspect passengers and seize contraband within the notified zone.

The affidavit strongly asserted that state police officers are not “proper officers” under Section 6 of the Customs Act and therefore have no legal authority to conduct seizures from passengers inside this area. Customs accused the police of trespassing into federal jurisdiction and running parallel enforcement operations inside the airport instead of assisting customs officers as mandated under Section 151 of the Act.

The affidavit also levelled serious allegations of passenger harassment, stating that police have been subjecting travellers to X-ray examinations and intrusive searches without securing mandatory orders from a Magistrate, a requirement under Section 103 of the Customs Act, especially when concealment of the gold inside the body, like rectal concealment, is suspected. Customs claimed this legal safeguard was ignored in many of the cases booked by the police, leading to potential violations of passenger rights.

It further alleged that the police have been melting and assaying seized gold on their own, despite lacking statutory authority to do so, which not only compromises the chain of custody but also creates discrepancies in purity and weight. Customs warned that such practices could undermine investigations and cripple adjudication proceedings, resulting in significant revenue loss to the Centre.

The affidavit claimed that the Karipur Police have carried out nearly 170 gold-related seizures inside the notified customs area, while Customs was officially informed of only 134 of those through court proceedings. Only six cases were directly handed over to the Customs, that too recently.

Customs argued that these unauthorised actions weaken evidence, obstruct federal investigations and disregard procedural safeguards that are vital in smuggling cases. It went a step further by warning that police officers involved in such unauthorised gold seizures could themselves be exposed to penalties under Section 112 of the Customs Act, a provision that punishes anyone who carries, deals with or disposes of goods liable to confiscation. The affidavit argued that when police personnel conduct searches and seize gold inside a Customs-notified area, their actions may legally amount to handling smuggled goods without authority.

“The consequent search and seizure of smuggled goods by any agency not empowered… may even be an act liable to penalty,” the affidavit said, signalling that illegal interventions by state police could trigger consequences normally reserved for offenders themselves.

Meanwhile, the Customs also urged the High Court to dismiss the petitions filed by Ibrahim and Muhammed and to direct that the seized gold be handed over to Customs for proper adjudication under the Customs Act. With both agencies now openly confronting each other in court, the High Court’s decision is expected to have far-reaching consequences.

The court, which considered the case on Monday, posted it for December 8 after the government pleader had requested time to file the statement for Kerala Police.