Tarun Kumar Vs The Commissioner of customs

Tarun Kumar vs The Commissioner of customs

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jan 27, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1419765

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1419765
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose
Decided On: Jan 27, 2026
Case Number: WP/3987/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Tarun Kumar

Respondent

The Commissioner of customs

Excerpt

.....by the customs department. he would also submit that an appeal has been preferred against the order in original by the petitioner. in view of the same, due to the subsequent developments, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition. however, liberty may be granted to the petitioner to raise all objections in the present proceedings pending before the appropriate competent authority as known to the petitioner under law.2. this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s case in this writ petition.3. since the prayer sought for in this writ petition has now becomeinfructuous on account of the subsequent developments in the case as recorded supra, this writ petition is disposed of as infructuous, by granting liberty to the page no.2 of 4 petitioner to raise all objections in the pending proceedings before the appropriate competent authority in the manner known to the petitioner under law. no costs. consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. index : yes / nospeaking order / non-speaking orderneutral citation case : yes/no sp to 2.the intelligence officer, chennai - 17. page no.3 of 4abdul quddhose, j.sp page no.4 of 4

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.01.2026
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.No.4044 of 2023 Tarun Kumar ... Petitioner Vs.
2.Intelligence Officer, Chennai - 17. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned seizure Memorandum of the 2 nd respondent in F.No.DRI/CZU/VIII/48/ENQ-1/INT-45/2022 dated 02.11.2022 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to hand over petitioner the custody of the BMW car bearing Registration No.TN 13 W 7607 and Bolero pick up vehicle bearing Registration No.TN 13 V 8856 which was seized by the 2nd respondent on 06.10.2022 in connection with the case in R.R.No.23/2022 in F.No.DRI/CZU/VIII/48/ENQ-1/INT-45/2022.
Page No.1 of 4 For Petitioner : Mr.C.K.M.Appaji For Respondents : Ms.Sai Srujan Tayi Senior Panel Counsel *****

ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, subsequent to the passing of the impugned seizure memorandum, the goods have been confiscated through an order in original passed by the Customs Department. He would also submit that an appeal has been preferred against the order in original by the petitioner. In view of the same, due to the subsequent developments, nothing survives for further adjudication in this writ petition. However, liberty may be granted to the petitioner to raise all objections in the present proceedings pending before the appropriate competent authority as known to the petitioner under law.

2. This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s case in this writ petition.

3. Since the prayer sought for in this writ petition has now become

infructuous on account of the subsequent developments in the case as recorded supra, this Writ Petition is disposed of as infructuous, by granting liberty to the Page No.2 of 4 petitioner to raise all objections in the pending proceedings before the appropriate competent authority in the manner known to the petitioner under law. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Index : Yes / No

Speaking order / Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No sp To 2.The Intelligence Officer, Chennai - 17. Page No.3 of 4

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

sp Page No.4 of 4

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties Tarun Kumar vs The Commissioner of customs Same Judge Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose