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 theThis 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
