Petitioner challenged an order-in-original confiscating gold recovered from him after his appellate and revision appeals failed. He sought redemption claiming ownership invoices and cited mental illness for delay. The Court held redemption is not a matter of right and declined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~5
Through: Mr. Richa Kumari and Mr. Pawan, Advs.
versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .....Respondent Through: Mr. Atul Tripathi, SSC, CBIC with Mr. Shubham Mishra, Mr. Gaurav Mani Tripathi, Mr. Akshay Sagar and Mr. Madhav Anand, Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
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 16/03/2026 at 16:43:28
appearing for the respondent, based on the conduct of the petitioner.
NITIN WASUDEO SAMBRE, J
AJAY DIGPAUL, J
MARCH 12, 2026/ AS/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 16/03/2026 at 16:43:28
2 issues framed by the court
Whether redemption of confiscated gold could be claimed as a matter of right by a petitioner carrying gold beyond permissible limits.
Whether mental illness justified belated approach to the Court and exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction.
Waseem Raja
Commissioner of Customs
Nitin Wasudeo Sambre
Ajay Digpaul
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
