New Delhi, May 8: The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Courtpassed an interim order on May 7 which stops Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS)from taking any coercive action on jewellers across India or impose penalty onthose who may not comply with BIA (BIS Act, 2016) regulations, Section 29(2) onmandatory hallmarking due to the lack of adequate infrastructure in terms ofassaying and hallmarking centres.
The Court ruled: "The contention is that the newregulation making it compulsory to hallmark gold jewellery before it is storedor sold, which has to come into force w.e.f. 1st June 2021, is likely to resultin great hardships to lakhs of jewellers in India and their number is stated tobe 5 lakhs."
The writ petition was filed by All India Gem & JewelleryDomestic Council (GJC), which is the industry's apex domestic Council thatensures promotion, protection and progress of jewellers. GJC was represented incourt by counsel, Rohan Shah.
Ashish Pethe, Chairman, All India Gem & JewelleryDomestic Council (GJC) stated, "Courts have seen the hardship of thejewellers. The order stated that further contention is that in proportion tosuch multitude of jewellers in India - the percentage of hallmarking centresavailable in India, is just about 34% of the 733 districts in the country andthat there are at least 488 districts in the country, which do not have anyhallmarking centres. It is further submitted that there are about 6,000 crorepieces of jewellery, which still need to be hallmarked."
Nitin Khandelwal, Past Chairman, GJC, said, "Courtshave been reasonable and strict with BIS as further contention is that if thereis any breach of the said mandate of law as provided under Sections 14 and 15of the Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 2016 (BIS Act), there is a penalty inoffence as provided under Section 29 of the BIS Act, 2016 punishable withmaximum imprisonment of one year. It is also submitted that within the timeavailable, it could not be possible for all the jewellers and for every pieceof jewellery presently available to be hallmarked before these provisions oflaw come into force."
Saiyam Mehra, Vice Chairman, GJC, commented, "It isfurther submitted that there are also other problems arising out of the presentCOVID restrictions, which prevent a person to travel from one district toanother district and that there are several districts, which do not have anyhallmarking centres yet. And the court has in the meanwhile, directed that nocoercive action shall be taken against the jewellers under Section 29(2) of theBIS Act, 2016, till next date of hearing on 14th June 2021. This is a bigrelief to the jewellers who shall now be fully protected from any actions fromBIS even though they may wish to still go ahead with mandatoryhallmarking."
Dinesh Jain, Director, GJC who represented GJC in the writpetition filed, commented, "The writ has been admitted on merit and noticehas been issued to BIS and all respondents. BIS is wise enough to know what todo in such a situation and we are sure that BIS shall not proceed withmandatory hallmarking without doing their homework properly. GJC is fullysupporting Hallmarking and pray in the writ petition that a ‘High LevelCommittee' be constituted by Honourable court to streamline and resolve allissues for the benefit of Consumers, Jewellers and core objective of BIS."
All India Gem and Jewellery Domestic Council (GJC)represents over 5,00,000 players comprising manufacturers, wholesalers,retailers, distributors, laboratories, gemmologists, designers, and alliedservices to the domestic Gems & Jewellery industry.