$~75

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Date of Decision: 18^thDecember, 2025

Uploaded on: 20th December, 2025

+ W.P.(C) 18552/2025

NAND KISHOR SHARMA .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Pramod Kant Saxena, Adv.

versus

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Aakarsh Srivastava, SSC

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. The hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, seeking release of one gold chain weighing 49 grams which was detained by the Customs Department vide detention receipt bearing No. 54471 dated 18th June, 2024. 3. A brief background of the Petitioner’s case is that, the Petitioner is an Indian passport holder bearing No. Z6929990 and had travelled to India on 18th June, 2024. Upon arrival at the Terminal-3, Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, the Petitioner was intercepted by the concerned officials of the Customs Department and the gold chain of the Petitioner was detained

by the Customs Department.

4. The Petitioner’s case is that no Show Cause Notice (hereinafter,

‘SCN’) has been issued to the Petitioner by the Customs Department

5. On the last date of hearing i.e., 8th December, 2025, this Court directed the Customs Department to produce the gold chain of the Petitioner before the Court. The same has been produced today in a sealed box.

6. The Court has perused the seized gold chain which has been produced today. Mr. Srivastava, ld. SSC submits that the same weighs 46 grams.

7. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was not afforded a personal hearing in this matter.

8. Mr. Srivastava, ld. SSC submits that Petition had waived the SCN and personal hearing. Moreover, ld. SSC submits that the Special Power of Attorney of the Petitioner had received an oral SCN from the Customs Department.

9. Heard. This Court has held repeatedly that standard pre-printed waivers of Show Cause Notice and personal hearing would not be valid in law as held in Amit Kumar v. The Commissioner of Customs, 2025:DHC:751- DB. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:

“16. A perusal of Section 124 of the Act along with the alleged waiver which is relied upon would show that the oral SCN cannot be deemed to have been served in this manner as is being alleged by the Department. If an oral SCN waiver has to be agreed to by the person concerned, the same ought to be in the form of a proper declaration, consciously signed by the person concerned. Even then, an opportunity of hearing ought to be afforded, inasmuch as, the person concerned cannot be condemned unheard in these matters. Printed waivers of this nature would fundamentally violate rights of persons who are affected. Natural justice is not merely lip-service. It has to be given effect and complied with in letter and spirit

17. The three-pronged waiver which the form contains is not even decipherable or comprehensible to the common man. Apart from agreeing as per the said form that the oral SCN has been served, the person affected has also waived a right for personal hearing. Such a form in fact shocks the conscience of the Court, that too in cases of the present nature where travellers/tourists are made to run from pillar to post for seeking release of detained goods [...]

19. This Court is of the opinion that the printed waiver of SCN and the printed statement made in the request for release of goods cannot be considered or deemed to be an oral SCN, in compliance with Section 124. The SCN in the present case is accordingly deemed to have not been issued and thus the detention itself would be contrary to law. The order passed in original without issuance of SCN and without hearing the Petitioner, is not sustainable in law. The Order-in-Original dated 29th November, 2024 is accordingly set-aside.”

10. Further, this Court in Mr Makhinder Chopra vs Commissioner of Customs New Delhi, 2025:DHC