Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 4986
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
VANIYA PEEDIKAYIL SAMAD – Appellant
Versus
THE ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 48350 OF 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.GIKKU JACOB
For the Respondents: SHRI.JOSE ANTONY, CGC
The court dismissed the writ petition as the date for appearance had lapsed, emphasizing the procedural compliance required.
Headnote:This writ petition seeks a writ of mandamus or appropriate directions concerning a summons issued under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioner sought adjournments and protections against coercive steps, but the court found no basis for further relief as the appearance date had lapsed. The court closed the writ petition without prejudice to the petitioner's rights and contentions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. requesting adjournment and protection from coercive measures. (Para 1) |
| 2. court finds no scope for relief as appearance date expired. (Para 2) |
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.48350 of 2025 -----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of January, 2026 JUDGMENT This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:
(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or appropriate direction, directing the 1st respondent to grant the petitioner a reasonable adjournment or alternative date for appearance pursuant to Exhibit P1 summons;
(ii) Issue a direction that the petitioner shall not be subjected to any coercive steps, including arrest or detention, during his appearance pursuant to Exhibit P1 summons;
(iii) Issue a direction that the statement of the petitioner, if recorded, shall be strictly voluntary and in accordance with law, without any threat, inducement or compulsion;
2. Ext.P1 summons was issued to the petitioner under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 , requiring the petitioner to appear before the authorities concerned on 24.12.2025. Now, the said date is over and therefore, I do not find any scope for considering the reliefs sought in this writ petition.
Accordingly, this writ petition is closed without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the petitioner.
Sd/-
