On a packed December morning at the Gujarat High Court, the courtroom stayed attentive as a dispute over imported fuel oil unfolded. At the heart of the matter was whether Aparajita Energy Private Limited’s cargo was wrongly seized on the suspicion that it was diesel disguised as marine fuel. By the afternoon, the Bench made its position clear, restoring the company’s right over the detained cargo and pulling up the authorities for acting on uncertain laboratory conclusions.
Background
Aparajita Energy, a trader of industrial oils, had imported bulk consignments of Distillate Marine Fuel through Pipavav Port in August 2025. Initial tests conducted by a government laboratory in Vadodara found the fuel compliant with Indian standards for marine distillate.
Read also:- Supreme Court settles long-running tax dispute on non-compete fees, clarifies capital natur
Trouble began when the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) drew fresh samples and, based on a later report from Delhi, detained the cargo under the Customs Act. The September report pointed to a single parameter-cloud point-being outside the prescribed limit and loosely remarked that the fuel had “characteristics of automotive diesel.” Acting on this, the DRI issued a seizure memo on October 1.
Court’s Observations
The Division Bench of Justices A.S. Supehia and Pranav Trivedi appeared unconvinced that such thin reasoning could justify seizure. The judges noted that out of fourteen technical parameters tested, only the cloud point failed, while all other indicators matched distillate marine fuel norms.
Read also:- Supreme Court Sets Aside Allahabad High Court’s Arrest Shield, Says No Blanket Protection While Probe Continues in Arms Licence Forgery Case
“The bench observed that cloud point relevance depends on where and how the fuel is actually used,” pointing out that even official clarifications say this factor matters mainly for ships operating in colder climates. The Court also flagged the vague nature of the test report’s conclusion that the fuel merely had “characteristics” of diesel, without stating which decisive standards were breached.
Referring to earlier releases of similar cargo at Kandla port and relying on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Gastrade International, the Bench stressed that classification disputes must be resolved using the “most akin” test, not assumptions. Ambiguity in expert opinion, the judges said, cannot be held against an importer.
Read also:- Supreme Court steps in on Rajasthan village naming row, restores single judge order quashing Amargarh and Sagatsar notifications over policy
Decision
Allowing the petition, the High Court quashed the DRI’s seizure memo and directed immediate release of the detained distillate oil stored at Pipavav Port. The Court, however, asked Aparajita Energy to submit an end-use certificate and cooperate fully with the ongoing investigation, making it clear that release does not shut the door on further inquiry.
Case Title: Aparajita Energy Private Limited vs Union of India & Others
Case No.: R/Special Civil Application No. 12944 of 2025
Case Type: Writ Petition (Customs / Import & Seizure Dispute)
Decision Date: 09 December 2025
