Wed Oct 08 22:10:00 UTC 2025: Here’s a summary of the text and a rewritten version as a news article:

**Summary:**

The Bombay High Court has criticized a senior officer from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) for overstepping his authority. The officer recalled a consignment of dry dates, already cleared by Customs, based on intelligence suggesting they originated from Pakistan, violating import restrictions. The court found his actions “high-handed” and not legally justified, emphasizing that legal procedures were ignored. The court ordered Customs authorities to issue a show-cause notice and, if the timeline is unmet, release the goods with a fine or bank guarantee.

**News Article:**

**Bombay High Court Slams DRI Officer for Illegal Recall of Cleared Goods**

**Mumbai, October 9, 2025** – The Bombay High Court has issued a scathing rebuke to a senior officer from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) for acting without legal authority in recalling a consignment of dry dates that had already been cleared by Customs. The court deemed the officer’s actions “prima facie high-handed” and in violation of established legal procedures.

The ruling stems from a petition filed by Mumbai-based importer, Make India Impex, after their consignment of 56 tonnes of dry dates, cleared by Customs on July 24th, was forcibly recalled. The goods, having been verified and subject to duties of ₹6.3 lakh, were released from the J.M. Baxi Container Freight Station (CFS) and transported to a warehouse. However, the DRI officer, Sumit Kataria, allegedly demanded the goods’ return based on intelligence suggesting they originated in Pakistan, contravening a DGFT import restriction.

While Kataria claimed he acted in good faith and only “requested” the goods’ return, the court found this explanation unconvincing. Justices M.S. Sonak and Advait M. Sethna pointed out that the consignment had been under customs scrutiny for a week and that the goods had already been cleared, with its origin verified.

“The sixth Respondent [Kataria]… by completely ignoring the statutory order under Section 47 of the Customs Act, and without compliance with any legal provisions, has virtually forced the Petitioner… to bring back such goods,” the court stated in its judgment delivered yesterday.

The court emphasized that even with intelligence suggesting wrongdoing, the officer was obligated to follow established legal channels, such as issuing a show-cause notice. The court rejected the reliance on Section 106 of the Customs Act, which allows officers to stop and search conveyances, stating that the provision did not apply to goods already cleared by Customs.

The High Court has directed Customs authorities to issue a show-cause notice to the importer within four weeks and resolve the matter within six weeks of receiving a response. Failure to meet this deadline will result in the release of the goods upon payment of a redemption fine or the submission of a bank guarantee. The court further highlighted that similar consignments from the same supplier and route had been cleared without objection shortly before this incident.

The case underscores the importance of adherence to the rule of law and legal procedures, even in the pursuit of legitimate intelligence. The Bombay High Court has made it clear that the “ends cannot always justify the means” and that statutory functionaries must operate within the bounds of their legally defined powers.

Read More