Offences by officers of customs
Section 136 of the Customs Act, 1962 deals with offences by officers of customs. If any officer of customs enters into or acquiesces in any agreement to do, abstains from doing, permits, conceals or [connives at any act or thing, whereby any fraudulent export is effected or] any duty of customs leviable on any goods, or any prohibition for the time being in force under this Act The Act came into force on 01 Feb 1963.
(1) If any officer of customs enters into or acquiesces in any agreement to do, abstains from doing, permits, conceals or 1[connives at any act or thing, whereby any fraudulent export is effected or] any duty of customs leviable on any goods, or any prohibition for the time being in force under this Act or any other law for the time being in force with respect to any goods is or may be evaded, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 2[three years], or with fine, or with both.
(2) If any officer of customs,--
(a) requires any person to be searched for goods liable to confiscation or any document relating thereto, without having reason to believe that he has such goods or document secreted about his person; or
(b) arrests any person without having reason to believe that he has been guilty of an offence punishable under section 135; or
(c) searches or authorises any other officer of customs to search any place without having reason to believe that any goods, documents or things of the nature referred to in section 105 are secreted in that place,
he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
(3) If any officer of customs, except in the discharge in good faith of his duty as such officer or in compliance with any requisition made under any law for the time being in force, discloses any particulars learnt by him in his official capacity in respect of any goods, he shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.
Section 136, The Customs Act, 1962 (Act 52 of 1962).
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
State Tr. Insp. of Police vs A. Arun Kumar
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
At the initial stage of criminal proceedings when considering whether to frame charges under Sections 227-228 (or 238-239) CrPC, if material on record discloses grave suspicion against the accused that has not been properly explained, the court is fully justified in framing charges and proceeding with trial, even if the strength of suspicion would not suffice for conviction. The test for prima facie case depends on broad probabilities and total effect of documents and evidence on record, not on conviction-level proof. Documentary evidence showing material discrepancies (such as added digits inflating quantities and values in export documents) that raise grave suspicion against accused is sufficient to frame charges, notwithstanding absence of eyewitness testimony, so long as the ingredients of alleged offences are discernible on the face of the material.
On this section: Penalty provisions - applied to allege customs violations by officials
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… To the same end is the decision in R.S. Seth <sup>523</sup> Supra at Footnote No.416 <sup>524</sup> Supra at Footnote No.424 Gopikrishan Agarwal vs. R.N. Sen, Assistant Collector of Customs & Ors.525 , dealing with Sections 105 and 136 of the Customs Act. In the case of Dr. Partap Singh526 , this Court upheld the dispensation provided in Section 37 of the FERA by adopting purposive interpretation to give full play to the legislative intent and negating the argument regarding incorporation of the provisions of the 1973 Code by pen and ink in that …
-
… To the same end is the decision in R.S. Seth <sup>523</sup> Supra at Footnote No.416 <sup>524</sup> Supra at Footnote No.424 Gopikrishan Agarwal vs. R.N. Sen, Assistant Collector of Customs & Ors.525 , dealing with Sections 105 and 136 of the Customs Act. In the case of Dr. Partap Singh526 , this Court upheld the dispensation provided in Section 37 of the FERA by adopting purposive interpretation to give full play to the legislative intent and negating the argument regarding incorporation of the provisions of the 1973 Code by pen and ink in that …
-
… To the same end is the decision in R.S. Seth <sup>523</sup> Supra at Footnote No.416 <sup>524</sup> Supra at Footnote No.424 Gopikrishan Agarwal vs. R.N. Sen, Assistant Collector of Customs & Ors.525 , dealing with Sections 105 and 136 of the Customs Act. In the case of Dr. Partap Singh526 , this Court upheld the dispensation provided in Section 37 of the FERA by adopting purposive interpretation to give full play to the legislative intent and negating the argument regarding incorporation of the provisions of the 1973 Code by pen and ink in that …
Made under this section, and citing it
2 instruments name this provision in its title or its text without being made under it.
- Clarification on levy of National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) on Cellular / mobile Phones on the basis of MRP / Retail Sale Price - Circular No.12/2009-Customs, dated 12.03.2009Circular 2009
- Levy of National Calamity Contingent duty under the Finance Act, 2003.- Circular No.41/2004-Customs, dated 7.6.2004Circular 2004
Questions about Section 136
What have the courts held on Section 136 of the Customs Act?
State Tr. Insp. of Police vs A. Arun Kumar (17 Dec 2014) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Penalty provisions - applied to allege customs violations by officials.
How do I find court cases under Section 136 of the Customs Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Customs Act 1962 136, section 136 Customs Act 1962, section 136 of the Customs Act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 1 reported judgment on this section is set out on this page, beginning with State Tr. Insp. of Police vs A. Arun Kumar (17 Dec 2014).
What should I read with Section 136 of the Customs Act, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 105 (Power to search premises), section 135 (Evasion of duty or prohibitions), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. 2 instruments name it without being made under it, most recently Clarification on levy of National Calamity Contingent Duty (NCCD) on Cellular / mobile Phones on the basis of MRP / Retail Sale Price - Circular No.12/2009-Customs, dated 12.03.2009 (2009), then Levy of National Calamity Contingent duty under the Finance Act, 2003.- Circular No.41/2004-Customs, dated 7.6.2004 (2004).
When did Section 136 of the Customs Act come into force?
Section 136 of the Customs Act, cited as Customs Act 1962 136, came into force on 01 Feb 1963, having been enacted on 13 Dec 1962. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 28. Recovery of duties not levied or not paid or short-levied or short-paid or erroneously refunded2145 words
- 2. Definitions1638 words
- 129A. Appeals to the Appellate Tribunal1170 words
- 27. Claim for refund of duty1060 words
- 127C. Procedure on receipt of an application under section 127B1056 words
- 138C. Admissibility of micro films, facsimile copies of documents and computer print outs as documents and as evidence872 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 17 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.