Pre-deposit waiver requires prima facie case and hardship; judicial lock-up alone did not justify total waiver

A request to modify a stay order requiring partial pre-deposit of penalty was rejected because the tribunal had already considered the appellant's financial hardship, the nature and value of the confiscated foreign-origin goods, and the absence of a prima facie case for full waiver. Judicial lock-up in another criminal case was held to be no basis for altering the stay order or granting total waiver, and revenue interest remained a relevant consideration. The modification application was therefore dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether modification of the stay order directing pre-deposit of a part of the penalty was warranted on the ground of financial hardship and prima facie illegality in the impugned order.

Analysis: The existing stay order had already taken into account the appellant's financial position, the nature and value of the foreign-origin goods confiscated, and the absence of a prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit. The fact that the appellant was in judicial lock-up in another criminal case was held to be no ground for altering the order or granting total waiver, and the revenue interest was also considered relevant.

Conclusion: Modification of the stay order was not justified, and the request for total waiver of pre-deposit was rejected.

---