SETH DURGAPRASAD ETC. vs H. R. GOMES

The Supreme Court held that the Superintendent of Customs could not seize documents under Rule 126L(2) of the Defence of India Rules, 1963, as this rule does not confer such authority, which is instead granted under Rule 126L(1) and (3). However, the seizure order made by the Collector of Customs under Section 110(3) of the Indian Customs Act, 1962 was valid, as it was executed while the documents were in the legal possession of the Superintendent. The court concluded that the appellants were not entitled to a writ since the Collector's order was legally effective despite the documents not being in physical possession of the Superintendent at the time of seizure.