The Delhi High Court has held that the Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) must copy relied upon documents and avoid unnecessary retention of seized devices throughout the proceedings.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Rajneesh Kumar Gupta has observed that the process could be adopted by the Commissioner of Customs in all the Commissionerates, so that persons from whom devices are seized can be returned the same, after the data is copied. The retention of the devices throughout the Show Cause Notice (SCN) proceedings and the prosecutions, unless essential, could then be avoided, as the devices themselves may become completely out-dated and retrieval of data from the same after a few years also becomes difficult.
The bench stated that the proper copying of the data and retention of the same on Servers in the Customs Department would also make it accessible to the investigation officers as also other personnel.
The Petitioners, Rakesh Kumar Gupta and Vibhuti Bhushan Das under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has sought the directions for the customs department to release the electronic devices of the Petitioners.
The Respondent-Directorateof Revenue Intelligence (DRI) received intelligence in respect of smuggling substantial quantities of foreign origin gold in a completely concealed manner through triangular valves.
Upon intelligence being received, the DRI took action and seized the goods. The freight forwarding was handled by M/s ECG Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd of which the Petitioners are the Directors.
The case of the Petitioners is that since now the investigation has been concluded and show cause notices have been issued, the devices ought to be released to the Petitioners. Hence, the prayer is for release of the electronic devices.
The petitioner contended that the devices were submitted at the time of the recording of statements and the Petitioners have no objection if the data on the devices is fully copied by the Department.
The department contended that the devices have been cloned, however, in view of objections which could be raised in respect of mode of proof and admissibility at the time when adjudication takes place, the devices have been retained. The Department is in the process of filing prosecution complaints against the Petitioners.
The court held that if any particular document, which is downloaded from the devices of the Petitioners is also relied upon by the Respondent either in the show cause notice proceedings or in the prosecution complaint, the said Relied Upon Documents (RUDs) shall be listed and copies shall be provided to the Petitioners. In light of the above, the Petitioner would not raise any objections as to non-fulfilment of any requirement under Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and Section 138C of the Customs Act, 1962.
The court directed the registry to communicate this order to the OSD (Legal) Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) through email (Osd-legal@gov.in )in order to enable preparation of a Standard Operating Procedure for data retrieval from electronic devices and preservation of the same.
Case Details
Case Title: Rakesh Kumar Gupta Versus Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence
Case No.: W.P.(C) 11518/2024
Date: 20th March, 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Akhil Krishan Maggu
Counsel For Respondent: Anurag Ojha
