HC Dismisses Petition to Halt DRI Investigation Over Misdeclared Import Values:

High Court dismissed a plea to halt a DRI investigation into under-valued imports, directing directors to cooperate with the authorities.

Court Refuses to Interfere in Prohibited Goods Probe; Directs Directors to Cooperate with Custom Authorities

Meetu Kumari

Mar 12, 2026

Last update on Mar 12, 2026

HC Dismisses Petition to Halt DRI Investigation Over Misdeclared Import Values Glamstone Cosmetics Pvt. Ltd. imported a shipment of eyeliners and lipsticks from China. Acting on specific intelligence, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence intercepted the consignment on suspicion of serious under-valuation and regulatory violations. According to the authorities, the declared value of the cosmetics was far below their actual market price, and the products allegedly lacked mandatory registrations under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. While the investigation was still underway, the company approached the Bombay High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It argued that the investigation was biased and sought directions to stop the probe. The petitioner also requested release of the goods or permission to re-export them, claiming that its directors were being repeatedly summoned and harassed during the inquiry.

Issue Before Court: Whether the High Court should intervene at an early stage to halt an ongoing investigation by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, and whether goods suspected to be prohibited or misdeclared can be released or re-exported during the investigation.

HC Ruling: The Hon'ble High Court dismissed the petition. The Court reiterated that writ courts normally do not interfere with investigations at a preliminary stage unless there is clear evidence of bad faith or lack of jurisdiction. In this case, the allegations involved possible under-valuation and non-compliance with regulatory requirements, which justified a detailed probe by the authorities.

The Court also noted that the directors had not fully cooperated with the summons issued during the investigation and observed that an inquiry cannot be conducted on the convenience of those being investigated. Since the goods were suspected to be prohibited and could be important evidence, the Court refused to order their release or allow re-export at this stage. The investigation was therefore allowed to continue in accordance with law.

About Author

Meetu Kumari

Content Manager

Meetu Kumari is an Experienced Advocate and Content Writer with 4+ years of demonstrated history of working in the law practice industry. Skilled in Developing Content, Researching, and Drafting. Strong professional with a Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) focused on Law from Gujarat National Law University.