Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6952
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Shail Jain, JJ
GENESIS ENTERPRISES – Appellant
Versus
PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER CGST DELHI EAST – Respondent
W.P.(C) 13821/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Bharat Bhushan Gupta, Ms. Nidhi Gupta, Mr. Anunay Mishra
For the Respondents: Mr. Arun Khatri, Ms. Anoushka Bhalla, Ms. Tracy Sebastian, Mr. Sahil Khurana, Mr. Akshay
Seizure of private data without authorization infringes constitutional privacy rights.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Right to Privacy - Search and Seizure - Petition challenging the unauthorized search and seizure of CCTV footage by the CGST Department. - Court held that seizure of surveillance footage without proper authorization infringes rights of privacy and must be scrutinized to protect individual autonomy. Application for interim relief on the removal of seized devices allowed; the court prohibits access to the seized recordings until further order. (Paras 3-10)
(B) Legality of Seizures - The court addressed the legal validity of the search conducted and emphasized the importance of proper authorization for seizures that may contain sensitive personal data. (Paras 4-5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner alleges unauthorized search and seizure of electronic devices including CCTV footage from their premises as violative of privacy rights. Mr. Gumber, partner of Genesis Enterprises, indicates concern over the nature of the material seized.
Findings of Court:
The court temporarily prohibits the CGST Department from accessing the seized memory cards until the next hearing date.
Issues: The legitimacy of the search carried out by the CGST Department and the violation of the petitioner's right to privacy in relation to the seized footage.
Ratio Decidendi: Proper authorization is necessary for any seizure that might infringe on an individual's right to privacy, especially concerning personal records captured in private spaces.
Result: Application for exemption allowed; access to seized recordings prohibited pending further hearing.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. allegation of unauthorized search and seizure. (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. discussion on pending petitions and representation. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 3. prohibition on accessing seized data. (Para 10) |
| 4. next steps for case listing. (Para 11) |
ORDER
09.09.2025
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
CM APPL. 56712/2025 (for exemption)
2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 13821/2025 & CM APPL. 56711/2025 (for interim relief)
3. This petition has been filed by the Petitioner– M/s Genesis Enterprises through its partner, Shri Abhishek Gumber seeking inter alia issuance of directions to declare the removal and seizure of storage devices from CCTV cameras, as unsustainable and impermissible and such search being violative of the right to privacy of the Petitioner.
4. The case of the Petitioner is that an unauthorized search was conducted by the CGST Department, Delhi East in cooperation with the CGST Department, Noida (hereinafter, ‘the CGST Department’) on 22nd July, 2025, wherein the residential premises of the Petitioner and his entire family was raided and a large number of electronic gadgets were also seized. Another main grievance of the Petitioner pertains to the sealing of the business premises of the Petitioner.
5. The illegality, according to the Petitioner, in the said search and seizure is that the CCTV footage of the residence of the Petitioner where various family members of the Petitioner reside have been seized without proper authorisation by the CGST Department. Thus,it is the case of the Petitioner that such seizure would not be permissible, considering that the CCTV footage which is seized would also have private data of the Petitioner and his family as the CCTV was covering private areas of the house. Further apprehension is expressed as the CCTV footage could also have recordings reflecting female members of the family.
6. The Court has heard Mr. Gupta, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Khatri, ld. Counsel for the Respondent. The various electronic gadgets which have been seized by the CGST Department during the search and seizure conducted on 22nd July, 2025 are listed in the panchnama as under:
| S. No. | Mobile Phone/DVR | Make | Model | Serial |
| 1. | 500 GB SATA HDD | Blue Feather | BFDT50S | BFDT50A2KD224198 |
| 2. | 500 GB SATA HDD | Western Digital | WD5000AKX | WMAUF066763 |
| 3. | 2 TB SATA HDD | Western Digital | WD20PURZ | WCC4M2XUPLZS |
| 4. | 500 GB SATA HDD | Western Digital | WD5000AKX | WCAYUL550288 |
| 5. | 160 GB | Seagate | ST3160215SC E | 5RX3S4RX |
| 6. | 16 GB data Traveller | Kingston | SE8 | |
| 7. | 128GB pendrive | Sandisk | Cruzer Blade | |
| 8. | 32 GB memory Card | Sandisk Ultra | 2424DXEXYOPC | |
| 9. | 32 GB Memory card | Sandisk Ultra | 3446DYGSHOE6 |
7. According to ld. Counsel for the Petitioner, the last two items in the panchnama i.e. the memory cards are from the CCTV cameras which have beenseized by the CGST Department.
8. Mr. Khatri, ld. Counsel submits that there are a total of 9 petitions that have been filed by the same Petitioner and the petitions are likely to be listed shortly.
9. Let all the petitions filed by the Petitioner be listed on 15th September, 2025. The Registry is directed to list all the petitions together.
10. It is made clear that till the next date of hearing, the CCTV cameras’ memory cards as also any recordings therein shall not be opened or viewed by the CGST Department. The concerned official who was present at the time when the seizure was effected from the CGST East Commissionerate shall remain present to assist the Court on the next date.
11. List all the petitions along with this matter on 15th September, 2025 in the supplementary list.
