Shiv Shakti Enterprises v. Union Of India Thru. Its Secretary
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Writ Petition is allowed to be withdrawn
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Writ Petition is allowed to be withdrawn. Sonali Mane 910-WP-12630-2025.DOC
Judgment
Shiv Shakti Enterprises through its Proprietor Mr. Mahender Singh Versus Union Of India Thru. Its Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice And Ors _______ … Petitioner … Respondents Mr. Sujay Kantawala, Mr. Prasannan Namboodiri, Ms. Aishwarya Kantawala a/w Jeffry Caleb, Mr. Ayush Jha for the Petitioner. Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra a/w Ms. Sangeeta Yadav, Mr. Rupesh Dubey, Mr. Ashutosh Mishra for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in both matters. Mr. Satyaprakash Sharma a/w Mr. Abhishek Mishra, Ms. Vaishali Malekar for Respondent No.6. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 26 FEBRUARY 2026 P.C.
This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following reliefs. a. That this Hon’blc Court be pleased to issue the Writ of Certiorari or the writ in the nature of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the record and proceedings of the case and after going into the legality, propriety and validity thereof and pass appropriate orders directing the Respondent No. 3 to 6 to release the impugned goods imported and covered by Bill of Entry No. 3354589 dated 19.07.2025 (Exhibit B) and Bill of Entry No. and 3549232 dated 28.07.2025 (Exhibit C) unconditionally; That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of b. Mandamus or a Writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other MANE SONALI DILIP Digitally signed by MANE SONALI DILIP 20:01:14 +0530 Sonali Mane 910-WP-12630-2025.DOC appropriate writ, order or direction ordering and directing the Respondent No.
3 to 6, their servants, sub-ordinates and agents: i, to forthwith lift the seizure of the goods imported and py covered by Bill of Entry No. 3354589 dated 19.07.2025 a2 (Exhibit B) and Bill of Amniry No. and 3549232 dated on No. 28.07.2025 (Exhibit C) and unconditionally release the same; ii, to issue Detention-cum-Demurrage Waiver Certificate for the complete period of the detention/seizure of the goods imported and covered by Bill of Entry No. 3354589 dated 19.07.2025 (Exhibit B) and Bill of Entry No. and 3549232 dated 28.07.2025 (Exhibit C); c. That pending hearing and disposal of the instant Writ Petition, restrain the Respondents from adopting any coercive action or otherwise, directly or indirectly, pursuant to the impugned Seizure Memo dated 22.08.2025 (Exhibit A) and direct the Respondent No. 3 to 6, their servants, sub-ordinates and agents: i. to lift the seizure of the goods imported and covered by Bill of Entry No.
3354589 dated 19.07.2025 (Exhibit B) and Bill of Entry No. and 3549232 dated 28.07.2025 (Exhibit C) and unconditionally release the same; ji. to issue Detention-cum-Demurrage Waiver Certificate for the complete period of the detention/seizure of the goods imported and covered by Bill of Entry No. 3354589 dated 19.07.2025 (Exhibit B) and Bill of Entry No. and 3549232 dated 28.07.2025 (exhibit C); d. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to grant interim and ad- interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause’(c) above. e. That this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct that the Petitioner be awarded costs. f. Such further and other reliefs be granted to the Petitioner as this Hon'ble Court may deem proper and fit in the nature and circumstances of the case.
Reply affidavit to the Petition has been placed on record. We proceeded with the hearing of the Petition, however, Mr. Kantawala, learned counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, fairly seeks leave to withdraw this Petition.
Operative part
Writ Petition is allowed to be withdrawn. Sonali Mane 910-WP-12630-2025.DOC
At this stage Mr. Kantawala would submit that the goods have been seized, he requests that all rights and contentions of the Petitioner in regard to making any application for sale or realization of the value of the goods be kept open. We accept the request, if so permissible in law.
Disposed of as withdrawn. No costs. (AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) Sonali Mane
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Writ Petition is allowed to be withdrawn
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 26 Feb 2026. The bench was AARTI SATHE, G S KULKARNI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.