Through this reference petition filed against the judgment dated 30.05.2019 passed by the learned Customs Appellate Tribunal, Peshawar Bench, the petitioner has formulated the following questions of law for determination of this court:-

1. Whether the order passed by learned Customs Appellate Tribunal is incorrect in law and is not tenable?
2. Whether the offence of smuggling foreign currency stood admittedly established against the respondents and, therefore, the confiscation of such currency was perfectly in accord with law and interference by the learned Tribunal was incorrect in law?
3. Whether the provisions of section 139 of the Customs Act, 1969 were totally misconstrued and misinterpreted by the learned Tribunal as the foreign currency in question was a notified item within the meaning of section 2(s) of the Act ibid?
4. Whether the cognizance of the matter by the Adjudicating Authority (i.e. Deputy Collector Customs) on the original side was perfectly with jurisdiction as it was not a case where duties and taxes were involved and thus pecuniary limits fixed by Section 179(1) of the Customs Act, 1969 were not attracted?
5. Whether, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the matter in hand, the case-law relied upon by the learned Tribunal was totally distinguishable and was not applicable upon the issue in hand?
6. Whether the impugned judgment of the learned Tribunal runs counter to thesettled principles of law squarely applicable in the matter?
7. Whether the august Tribunal has erred in law in allowing the appeal so filedby the respondents and ordering release of confiscated foreign currency?
8. Brief facts of the case are that the staff of Khyber Rifles seized foreign currency viz US Dollars, Saudi Riyal and UAE Dirhams, as par recovery memo. No.12/2014 (dated 01.02.2014) worth Pakistani rupees 3.65,50,150/-, at Michni Post on 01.02.2014. On demand, the owners, namely, Noor Muhammad and Elahi Bakhsh failed to produce any legal documents of the said currency, hence they were charged for violation of relevant provisions of the Customs Act, 1969 read with sections 3(1) and 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1850 and Foreign Exchange (Regulation) Act, 1947. After completing the requisite formalities, the case was referred for adjudication and the learned Deputy Collector Customs (Adjudication), Peshawar vide Order-in-Original dated 28.06.2014 outrightly confiscated the said currency. Feeling aggrieved, the respondent filed appeal, which was dismissed by the learned Collector of Customs (Appeals), Peshawar vide judgment dated 16.12.2014. Dissatisfied therefrom, they filed further appeal, which was accepted and the petitioner was directed to return the impugned currency to its lawful owners vide Judgement dated 30.05.2019 impugned herein.
9. Arguments heard and record gone through,
10. According to the seizing agency, the action of the respondents fell within the ambit of smuggling, hence they were rightly proceeded under the law, however, the learned appellate tribunal has held that getting hold of them without providing opportunity of declaring the contents of their baggage and that too at the appropriate place to the appropriate officers of Customs is denial of fundamental rights of the citizens guaranteed under Article 24 of the Constitution, which mandates that no person shall be deprived of his property save in accordance with law, besides, not fulfilling the requirements of section 139 of the Act. Record reveals that the respondents were found in possession of currency at Michni check post on their way to Landi Kotal/Torkham border with Afghanistan, which fell within the limits of Pakistan, per se, would not be hit by an attempt of smuggling. Moreover, the provisions relating to smuggling cannot be attracted in a situation when the respondents were not afforded any opportunity to make declaration to the Customs. With regard to jurisdiction, suffice it to say that the case of impugned currency was adjudicated at the original stage by the learned Deputy Collector Customs (Adjudication), Peshawar vide Order-in-Original dated 23.06.2014, however, there is nothing on record to show that he was untrusted with the powers of Additional Collector or Collector to adjudicate the case, which is also a point that prevailed with the learned appellate tribunal.
11. In the circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner was asked to show any illegality or irregularity having been committed by the learned Customs Appellate Tribunal, Peshawar Bench while passing the impugned judgment. In response to the query made, though he tried to convince the court and make out a case for Interference but in his effort he neither referred to any law which has been violated or misinterpreted nor lay hand on any document which could be made a base for interference in the impugned findings. We, on our own, have examined the record and also gone through the impugned judgment and are of the view that the learned Customs Appellate Tribunal, Peshawar has dealt with that matter properly and justly and same is outcome of proper appreciation of law on the subject. Neither any Illegality or irregularity nor any misreading or non-reading of evidence has been pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner in the impugned judgment in order to create a dent therein, hence, no exception could be taken to it.
12. For what has been discussed above, this petition, being devoid of legal merit, is hereby dismissed and the questions of law formulated are answered in the negative. However, the strictures/remarks rendered by the learned Customs Tribunal in para-9 of the impugned judgment with regard to wrong jurisdiction and remedial action against the concerned officers, in our view, are not proper and justified, hence, the same are expunged.
13. Office is directed to send copy of this judgment under seal of the court to the Customs Appellate Tribunal, Peshawar Bench, Peshawar in terms of section 196 (5) of the Customs Act.

MQ/212/P Application dismissed.