Delhi High Court - Orders
Aditya Kaushik vs Commissioner Of Customs on 25 February, 2026
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 6416/2025
ADITYA KAUSHIK .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pawan, Adv.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Piyush Beriwal, SSC with
Ms. Ruchita Srivastava and Ms. Neha
Kamboj and Mr. Dev Aaseri, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
ORDER
% 25.02.2026 CM APPL. 10990/2026 (Release of goods)
1. This application is taken out by the original petitioner seeking enforcement and directions to comply with the order dated 18 th December 2025.
2. This Court vide order dated 18th December 2025 in paras 7, 8, 9 and 10 has made following observations:
"7. The Petitioner is also present in person. From the explanation given, it appears that the Petitioner's case is genuine. Accordingly, let the Petitioner's chain be released to the Petitioner subject to only payment of redemption fine of Rs.75,000/- and warehousing charges as applicable on the date of detention.
8. The Petitioner shall appear before the Customs Department on 7th January, 2026 at 11:00 AM in person or through an Authorised Representative, in which case, a proper email from the Petitioner or some form of communication to be sent to the Customs Department that the This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26 Petitioner has authorised the concerned Authorised Representative to appear on behalf of the Petitioner. The Petitioner shall then appear virtually for verification of credentials.
9. The Nodal Officer mentioned below shall facilitate the Petitioner's appearance before the competent authority for compliance with the present order:
Mr. Mukesh Gulia, Superintendent, Legal Office of Commissioner, Customs IGI Airports, T-3, New Delhi Email id: [email protected]
10. The gold chain produced today has been returned to the concerned official from the Customs Department who is present in Court today."
3. After the application was taken out for compliance, this Court had passed an order on 17th February 2026 which reads thus:
"1. Learned counsel for the respondent is seeking an adjournment on the ground that the IA moved by him seeking clarification of the order dated 18th December, 2025 is stated to be listed tomorrow.
2. We are not convinced on the aforesaid cause cited by the learned counsel for the respondent in not reporting compliance of the order dated 18th December, 2025, when in fact, the same should have been complied with either by 7th or 8th of January, 2026.
3. In such an eventuality, we are of the prima facie view that the respondent has not complied with order dated 18th December, 2025.
4. We direct the learned counsel appearing for the respondent to serve the copy of this order on the Commissioner. We also grant him time of one week to submit his response.
5. List for further consideration on 25th February, 2026."
4. In compliance with the order dated 17th February 2026, an affidavit in reply is placed on record duly sworn by the Principal Commissioner Customs.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26
5. A perusal of the said affidavit demonstrates that the respondent has taken out a revision under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962, and notices were ordered on 28th May 2025. It is claimed that the notices in the revision are already served on the original petitioner. The said officer has further stated on affidavit that the Department is surely at fault for not bringing the issue of filing revision before this Court but equally sought to blame the petitioner for suppressing the said fact from the Court. It is further claimed that the petitioner has pursued the present petition through parallel proceedings.
6. The relevant pleadings of the said officer reads thus:
"8. That it is submitted that Respondent department is surely at fault for not bringing to this Hon'ble Court's notice the filing of revision petition, but the Petitioner herein was duly served in the revision matter on 31.05.2025 and, despite the availability of a statutory remedy available under Section 129DD Customs Act, 1962, the petitioner having invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court by filing the present writ petition in parallel thereto, should also have apprised this Hon'ble Court of a review petition being filed once he was served in the same on 31.05.2025.
9. That the Respondent submits that once the Petitioner was served with the notice, it was incumbent upon him to inform this Hon'ble Court of the same."
7. According to the said officer, against the order-in-original dated 1st May 2024, in an appeal, order was passed on 28th February 2025 ,wherein the order-in-original was confirmed, and goods were directed to be released to the petitioner. Para 10 of the order-in-original, which still stands, as This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26 neither the respondent is able to obtain a stay from the revisional authority nor has it been able to convince the revisional authority to put the original petitioner to certain conditions, reads thus:
"10. In view of the foregoing, I pass the following order:
ORDER
i) I deny the 'Free Allowance' if any, admissible to the Pax Aditya Kaushik for not declaring the detained goods to the Proper Officer at Red Channel as well to the Customs Officer at Green Channel who intercepted him and recovered the detained goods from him.
ii) I declare the passenger. Aditya Kaushik, is an "ineligible Passenger" for the purpose of the Notification No. 50/2017-
Customs dated 30.06.2017 (as amended) read with Baggage Rules, 2016 (as amended).
iii) I order confiscation of "One gold chain having purity 982 weight 100 grams valued at Rs. 6,24,631/-" recovered from the Pax Aditya Kaushik and detained vide DR No. DR/INDEL4/24.03.2024/004069 dt. 24.03.2024 under section 111(d). 111(j) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962;
iv) I give an option to redeem, the goods confiscated, above, on payment of fine of Rs.75.000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand Only) along-with applicable rate of Customs duty on tariff valuation as on the date of detention of goods. I allow release of the detained goods within 120 days of issue of this order under Section 125(3) of Customs Act, 1962. The redemption is to be allowed after the completion of legal formalities in this regard and This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26 also fulfillment of any regulatory clearances/approvals required. The offer of redemption, if accepted, shall be subject to condition that the Pax shall not dispute the identity and valuation of the detained goods. The offer of redemption shall cease after 'One Hundred Twenty Days from date of the receipt of this order;
v) I also impose a penalty of Rs. 62,000/- (Rupees Sixty Two Thousand Only) on the Pax Aditya Kaushik under section 112 (a) and 112(b) of the Customs Act. 1962."
8. There is another facet to the matter. On 04th February 2026, an application seeking modification of the order dated 18th December 2025, of which the compliance is sought in the present application, was moved.
9. The fact about moving of the application for modification was within the knowledge of this Court as could be inferred from the order dated 17 th February 2026.
10. On 17th February 2026, this Court was about to initiate contempt proceedings against the Commissioner Customs for non-compliance of the order dated 18th December 2025. However, it is only upon the insistence of the learned senior standing counsel appearing for the respondent, Mr. Piyush Beriwal, that this Court had refrained from doing so, and granted an opportunity to the Commissioner Customs. Our order dated 17 th February 2026 is very clear on the said issue.
11. Having regard to the conduct of the Commissioner Customs, noted hereinabove, we are of the prima facie opinion that this conduct is purely with an intention to show disrespect and disregard to the order dated 18 th December 2025 and 17th February 2026 referred above, passed by this This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26 Court. Despite an opportunity being given to comply with the order, no steps are taken, but the said officer has taken recourse to blaming the petitioner/applicant for not bringing certain facts to the notice of the Court which was equally a failure on their part.
12. In the aforesaid background, we deem it appropriate to cause notice of contempt to Mr. Dheeraj Rastogi, Principal Commissioner Customs, as to why the charge under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, be not framed against him.
13. We permit the said officer to submit his response to the aforesaid within a period of two weeks from today.
14. Having regard to the gross mischievous conduct on the part of the Principal Commissioner, Mr. Dheeraj Rastogi, we further cause a Bailable Warrant in sum of Rs.5 /- against the said officer.
15. We direct the DCP, IGI Airport, to execute the aforesaid warrant by the returnable date and file an affidavit of compliance to that effect.
16. We further issue show cause to the Principal Commissioner as to why the disciplinary proceedings be not directed against him and as to why an adverse entry in his service record be not made qua his serious misconduct.
17. The response to the aforesaid may also be included in the affidavit to be filed by the said officer qua the notice of contempt issued to him.
18. The matter is pre-emptively fixed on 18th March 2026 at 2:30 PM to ensure the physical presence of the said officer before this Court.
19. After the order was dictated in open Court during the first half, learned counsel for the respondent/Commissioner of Customs, Mr. Piyush Beriwal, has mentioned the matter in the second half in the presence of Mr. Rastogi, the In-charge, Principal Commissioner.
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26
20. It is assured that every endeavour shall be made to release the goods by the end of the day and the compliance shall be reported by tomorrow at 2:30 PM.
21. Till then the order dictated by this Court is kept in abeyance.
22. List on 26th February, 2026, at 2:30PM.
NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J AJAY DIGPAUL, J FEBRUARY 25, 2026/AS/av/sk/dd This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 26/02/2026 at 20:37:26