Sun, Nov 09, 2025 | Jumada al-Awwal 19, 1447 | Fajr 05:13 | DXB
28.3°C
The watch was confiscated after officials claimed he failed to declare it at the Green Channel

A Dubai man’s Rolex, seized at Delhi airport last year, became the subject of a legal battle that ended this week with a partial victory in India’s High Court.
According to a Delhi High Court order seen by Khaleej Times, customs officials at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport stopped Indian expat Mahesh Malkani in March 2024 and seized the Rolex Submariner worth about Dh56,000 that he was wearing.
The watch was confiscated after officials claimed he failed to declare it at the Green Channel. Months later, customs allowed him to redeem the timepiece for re-export, but only after paying a Dh7,500 fine plus a Dh6,250 penalty.
Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels.
What pushed the matter into court was the department’s claim that the single watch was a “commercial quantity". Malkani challenged this, saying it was absurd to treat one personal watch as a commercial consignment.
The Delhi High Court agreed, ruling that “one Rolex watch cannot be held to be a commercial quantity and there is no reason as to why the same cannot be kept for personal use".
Still, the victory was not complete. The court upheld the fines and penalties, and said Malkani must also pay all warehousing charges that have piled up since the seizure. The deadline to reclaim the watch has now been extended until October 31.
The ruling serves as a reminder to travellers: under Indian rules, luxury items worth more than Dh2,000 must be declared on arrival. Failing to do so can result in costly fines even if the item is your own wristwatch.
Legal experts said the judgment provides much-needed clarity. “This ruling underscores that customs must take a practical view of what counts as ‘personal use’ versus ‘commercial quantity,’” Supreme Court lawyer Dr Sujay Kantawala told Khaleej Times. He said the Bench corrected an arbitrary classification while still preserving statutory safeguards under the Customs Act.
According to him, the decision draws a pragmatic line: one high-value personal item cannot automatically be treated as commercial, and passengers are entitled to protection against generic, cut-and-paste orders that lack proper reasoning.