Delhi HC fines customs for harassing importer over seized items dubbed sex toys
The customs department argued that the products in the consignment were for sexual pleasure rather than massagers and that their import was prohibited as per a 1964 notification
The Delhi high court has imposed a ₹50,000 cost liable to be deducted from the salary of the concerned official while dismissing a customs department plea for review of an order directing it to release consignments seized for containing “sex toys”, citing harassment and lack of merit.
On October 30, the court directed the release after Techsync, the importer, challenged the January 24 and 31 seizure of consignments imported under the heads “Head and Chic Massagers” and “Silicone Therapy Sleeve”.
The department argued that the products in the consignment were for sexual pleasure rather than massagers and that their import was prohibited as per a 1964 notification. In its review plea, the customs department said that such imported products require licensing or certification from the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI), which was not done. The department argued that the firm also failed to furnish the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) registration certificate mandated under the Battery Waste Management Rules, 2022, as certain seized items were battery-operated.
A bench of justices Prathiba M Singh and Shail Jain said Techsync was being harassed unnecessarily. “...when clearly the earlier consignments of the petitioners were cleared with objections, and the consignments of various third parties were also cleared,” said the bench in its order on Friday last.
“...the review petition is dismissed, subject to the costs of ₹25,000 in each of the petitions to be paid to the petitioners by the customs department. The cost is liable to be deducted from the salary of Mr Jainendra Jain, assistant commissioner of customs.”
Techsync’s lawyer, Piyushi Garg, said there was no ground for review as the department raised the same arguments when the October 30 order was passed. She argued that the massagers did not require the DCGI approval since they were not intended for therapeutic use or disease alleviation but for wellness and relaxation.
The court said that Techsync was at liberty to apply for an EPR certificate even after the release of goods. It had earlier directed the release of the products, noting that similar products were being sold domestically and there was no prohibition on their sale.
The court had said that the customs commissioner acted contrary to the law by relying on personal assumptions about the intended use of the imported body massagers. The court added they were branded obscene solely on the speculative possibility that they could be used as sex toys.
The court had noted the department’s actions of permitting other companies to import identical products without objection and selectively seizing the firm’s consignment. It had directed the department to hold an inter-ministerial consultation to frame a policy on the import of sex toys.
The customs department claimed the items appealed to “prurient interest” and were therefore obscene under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 294.
The Delhi High Court dismissed a customs department plea to review its order mandating the release of seized consignment containing “sex toys,” imposing a Rs 50,000 cost on an official for harassment. Techsync challenged the seizures, arguing the items were for wellness. The court criticized the customs for inconsistently seizing goods and ordered a policy review on imports.