Delhi HC Waives ₹50K Costs, Orders Samosas For DHCBA Staff In Indus Birra Case

In a rather unconventional turn of events, the Delhi High Court has not only waived a hefty cost of ₹50,000 imposed on a beverage company but also ordered its counsel to distribute samosas and tea to all employees of the Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) within a week. Justice Saurabh Banerjee passed the directive while allowing an application by Indus Birra Beverages & Ors. seeking waiver of costs imposed earlier for withholding a trial court order.

A Cheque Bounce Case Takes an Unusual Twist

The matter stemmed from a criminal complaint filed against the company under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, concerning a dishonoured cheque. Indus Birra Beverages had approached the High Court seeking quashing of the complaint. However, on August 20, 2026, the Court dismissed the petition and imposed costs of ₹50,000 after observing that the company had not made a full disclosure of a trial court order and had made contrary statements before different courts.

The petitioners then filed an application for condonation of a six-day delay in filing the waiver plea, along with the main application seeking waiver of the costs. The delay was condoned, and the Court proceeded to consider the waiver request.

"Samosas and Tea" – A Unique Condition for Waiver

Allowing the application for waiver, Justice Banerjee stated, “Considering the factual matrix involved, the present application is allowed and the cost of Rs.50,0000/- imposed vide order dated 20.08.2026 is hereby waived.” But the order did not stop there. In a gesture that blends legal discretion with a touch of goodwill, the Court further directed, “Learned counsel for the petitioners is called upon to distribute samosas and tea to all the employees of Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) within a period of one week.”

The Implications: More Than Just a Cost Waiver

While the waiver of costs provides relief to Indus Birra Beverages, the directive to treat the bar association employees reflects a novel approach to enforcing accountability. It subtly underscores the expectation that parties and their counsel maintain candour before the court. The order also serves as a reminder that courts, while dispensing justice, can craft remedies that go beyond mere monetary penalties.

The case, titled Indus Birra Beverages & Ors. v. Ishaan Associates , is a rare instance where a judicial order has combined legal pragmatism with a dash of culinary diplomacy. As the lawyers and staff of DHCBA await their samosas and tea, the legal community will likely remember this as a judgment that added flavour to the corridors of justice.