Delhi High Court Directs Release of Seized Gold, Notes Redemption Relief Already Granted

The Delhi High Court has directed Customs authorities to release seized gold after noting that an individual passenger had already been granted redemption of the goods in appeal, which was affirmed in revision.

A bench of Justice Nitin Wasudeo Sambre and Justice Ajay Digpaul observed that the petitioner, Harish Kumar, had secured substantial relief through the appellate process, which stood affirmed by the Revisional Authority. Emphasising this, the Court directed immediate release of the gold and observed:

“The principal relief sought by the petitioner in the writ petition is for return/release of the seized gold articles. The said relief already stands substantially granted under the OIA dated 27.06.2025, which has also been affirmed by the Revisional Authority vide order dated 05.03.2026.Accordingly, the Respondent shall forthwith release the concerned gold articles to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner complying with the conditions stipulated in the OIA dated 27.06.2025, namely payment of the applicable customs duty, redemption fine of ₹75,000/- and penalty of ₹75,000/-, if not already paid.”

The court noted that in view of these developments, no further interference was required and ensured that the relief granted in appeal was implemented.

The case arose from the detention of gold jewelry carried by the Kumar, an individual passenger arriving in India from Bangkok.

He claimed the gold items were personal jewellery, pointing to invoices and photographs placed on record in support of that case. Customs officials, however, treated the goods as liable for confiscation, denied baggage allowance, and imposed penalty proceedings.

In appeal, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) partly modified the adjudicating authority's order. While the penalty was sustained, the appellate authority allowed Kumar to redeem the confiscated gold on payment of redemption fine and applicable customs duty instead of ordering absolute confiscation.

The Customs Department carried the matter in revision, contending that Kumar had improperly crossed the green channel and attempted to evade duty. The Revisional Authority declined to interfere. It observed that Kumar was not shown to be a habitual offender and that the record did not disclose any connection with organized smuggling activity.

Recording these findings, the High Court said no case for further interference was made out and directed the authorities to implement the relief that had already been granted in the appellate proceedings.

On warehouse charges, the court held that once redemption had been allowed, Kumar ought not to be burdened with such charges thereafter. It accordingly granted a waiver of warehouse charges from the date of the appellate order until release of the goods.

The court directed release of the gold subject to payment of duty, redemption fine, and penalty and dismissed the petition.

For Petitioner: Advocates Pawan and Richa Kumari.

For Respondents: Standing Counsel Avijit Dikshit with Advocate Monika Verma