$~105 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI # CNR No. DLHC010356162026 + W.P.(C) 11082/2026, CM APPL. 51218/2026 and CM APPL. 51219/2026 BALDEV AND ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Vishal Boora, Mr. Nikhil Malik, Mr. Deepanshu and Mr. Sahil, Advs. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Kartik Khokhar, SPC along with Mr. Ashish Sharma, Adv. and Mr. Nring Chamwibo Zeliang, GP. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN O R D E R % 05.08.2026 1. Through the present Writ Petition, the Petitioner has prayed for the following substantive reliefs: “a) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to entertain the appeal proposed to be filed by the petitioners against Order-in-Original No.128/ADJ/2025 dated 28.02.2025 and decide the same on merits; b) To condone the delay and Direct the respondent authorities to allow the Petitioners to file the appeal in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case;” 2. It is the case of the Petitioners that, on 13.01.2024, upon their arrival at Indira Gandhi International Airport, New Delhi, from Bangkok, the Customs Authorities conducted a personal and baggage search, during which certain gold ornaments, collectively weighing 635 grams, were recovered and seized. Consequent thereto, adjudication proceedings were initiated under the provisions of the This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/08/2026 at 11:46:46 Customs Act, 1962 (to be read as Act of 1962). 3. Admittedly, the Adjudicating Authority passed an Order-in- Original dated 28.02.2025. Against the aforesaid Order, an Appeal under Section 128(1) of the Act of 1962 is maintainable before the competent Appellate Authority. 4. The Petitioners contend that their erstwhile counsel failed to inform them about the passing of the aforesaid Order and they acquired knowledge thereof only recently, i.e., upon initiation of recovery proceedings. It is in this backdrop that they urged that the delay in preferring the statutory appeal deserves to be condoned. 5. This Court is of the considered view that once the statute provides an efficacious appellate remedy against the Impugned Order, any application seeking condonation of delay in preferring such appeal must necessarily be addressed to the Appellate Authority, which is determined to consider the same in accordance with law. The extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court cannot be invoked to bypass the statutory mechanism. 6. Hence, the Petitioner, if so advised, may avail statutory remedy of appeal, along with an appropriate application seeking condonation of delay, before the competent Appellate Authority. 7. In view of the aforesaid, the present Petition, along with pending applications, is dismissed. ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. SHAIL JAIN, J. AUGUST 5, 2026 s.godara/hr This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 10/08/2026 at 11:46:46