Calcutta High Court
WPA/2006/2026 of MANOJ KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. on 6 October 2026
Ct. No.6 P.A./ A ,P IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Circuit Bench at
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
06.10.2026 Ct. No.6 P.A./A,P
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Circuit Bench at Jalpaiguri Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction
WPA No. 2006 of 2026
Manoj Kumar v/s Union of India and Ors.
Mr. Arijit Bose Mr. Mahesh Panwar Mr. Sisir Kr. Roy Mr. Anjali Roy Mr. Aditya Anand
…for the petitioner.
Mr. Ratan Banik Mr. Bishwa Raj Agarwal …for the Respondents..
The petitioner seeks release of the seized goods and vehicle by the Joint Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata. Learned counsel for the petitioner takes this Court to an order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Bureau of Investigation (North Bengal) dated 14th July, 2026 wherein the said authority has directed release of the goods which were inspected by him and found to be in good condition. The letter also states that no discrepancy is noticed either in the documents or in the physical verification of goods. Pursuant to representations submitted by the driver and helper of the vehicle, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, by a letter issued on 13th August, 2026, recorded that the goods did not conform to the prescribed standard and were unsafe for human consumption. He observed that the goods were prima facie liable for confiscation. By a subsequent letter issued on 14th August, 2026, the goods and vehicle were provisionally released. However, a corrigendum was issued by the authority on 20th August, 2026 whereby only the seized vehicle was directed to be released. Opposing the prayer of the petitioner, learned counsel for the Customs authority submits that the goods were seized under Section 110 of The Customs Act, 1962. An application has been made before the jurisdictional Magistrate for certifying a correctness of the inventory, which is pending. Also, the order passed by the Customs authority is appealable under Section 128 of the Act of 1962. The writ petition is not maintainable, since the statutory remedy has not been availed of by the petitioner. On prayer of the petitioner, liberty is granted to prefer a statutory appeal under Section 128 of the Act before the appropriate authority, ventilating his grievance. In the event such appeal is preferred, the appropriate authority shall deal with the same as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall however be no order as costs. Since no affidavit is invited, the allegations contained in the petition are deemed not to have been admitted. Urgent certified website copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all requisite formalities.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.)