No Stigma on Career: Delhi HC Sets Aside Customs Penalty on 19-Year-Old

The writ petition was against an order dated 31st March 2025 of the Commissioner of Customs (Delhi Airport) imposing a penalty under the Customs Act. The above-mentioned order was made pursuant to a seizure dated 1st September 2022 of fourteen gold chains of 600 grams and four silver-coated rings of 67 grams, aggregating 667 grams of gold valued at Rs. 28,81,258/-. It was held that the free allowance would not be available, and the passengers were made ineligible under Notification No.50/2017-Cus, read with Baggage Rules, 2016. The goods seized were directed to be confiscated absolutely, and a fine was levied, inter alia, Rs. 5,00,000/- on the coach and Rs. 2,00,000/- per head of the remaining team members.

The record showed that the coach had given chains and rings to members of the team. Statements recorded during proceedings confirmed that the items did not belong to the players but were handed over by the coach. The petitioner, aged 19 years, submitted that the penalty imposed on him would cause permanent stigma and affect his career. The coach, who had been noticed by the Court, appeared and confirmed that he had handed over the items, stated that he had already challenged the order before the appellate authority, and tendered an apology, which was accepted by the petitioner.

Main Issue: Whether the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- imposed on the petitioner was sustainable when the articles had been handed over by the coach and there was no independent evidence against the petitioner.

HC Held: The Court noted that the penalty imposed on the petitioner was based only on the fact that he was carrying the items given to him by the coach. The recorded statements, including the confession of the coach, revealed that the petitioner was not the owner of the seized items and had brought them on the instruction of the coach. The Court noted that the petitioner was a youth athlete, 19 years old, and that upholding the penalty would unjustifiably stigmatize him. It was also pointed out that the coach had owned up to the fault and offered an apology to the petitioner before the Court, which had been accepted by the petitioner.

The Court suspended the penalty of Rs. 2,00,000/- imposed upon the petitioner vide order dated 31st March 2025. The removal of penalty was ordered so that no stigma is attached to the petitioner and his future career prospects are not hampered. It was made clear that the coach had already preferred appeal against the order of penalty before the appellate authority and the same was pending separately. The writ petition was disposed off under these orders and pending applications were terminated.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below