01 / ANALYSIS
Overview of the Case
The Lahore High Court examined an overnight raid on traders' shops and godowns in Multan under sections 162–163 of the Customs Act, 1969. The central question was whether Customs officers could depart from statutory search procedures and binding FBR operating directions to avert resistance. The Court treated prescribed safeguards as substantive legal requirements rather than optional formalities.
02 / ANALYSIS
Brief Facts
Traders operating in the Tyre Market near Vehari Chowk, Multan, challenged a Customs (Enforcement) operation conducted during the night of 28–29 January 2026 with police assistance. The traders alleged that closed premises were forcibly entered, goods were seized and inventory and witness requirements were not observed. Customs authorities disputed the allegations of wrongdoing but explained that the operation had been undertaken at night to avoid anticipated resistance or protests. The traders petitioned the High Court seeking to invalidate the search and consequential proceedings.
03 / ANALYSIS
Questions of Law
- Which criminal-procedure safeguards apply to a Customs search under section 163?
- Could officials conduct a nighttime raid without the approval required by FBR directions?
04 / ANALYSIS
The Court's Answers
Which criminal-procedure safeguards apply to a Customs search under section 163?
Answer. Section 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure applies to searches made under section 163 of the Customs Act, whether with or without warrants, including the statutory witness safeguards. The Court found that the procedure adopted in the challenged operation had not complied with those requirements.
“Section 103 of Cr.P.C, which is applicable to search with or without warrants, shall be applicable.”
Could officials conduct a nighttime raid without the approval required by FBR directions?
Answer. No. The respondents were obliged to observe the applicable directions for nighttime searches, including prior approval by the Chief Collector or Director General of Intelligence and Investigation-Customs, as appropriate. Anticipated unrest did not excuse non-compliance; the search and seizure were held without lawful authority.
“the prior approval of Chief Collector of Customs or the Director General of I&I-Customs was to be obtained”
05 / ANALYSIS
Practical Relevance
Importers, warehouse operators and traders should maintain contemporaneous records of a raid: warrant or stated statutory authority, time, officers present, independent witnesses, inventory, goods detained, and any required approval. Challenges should identify the precise procedural safeguard disregarded. The judgment does not create general immunity from lawful Customs enforcement.