A K GHOSH DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Vs. STATE
LAWS(CAL)-1973-7-5
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on July 24,1973

A.K.GHOSH, DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Chanda, J. - (1.) This is an application under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India for a certificate that it is a fit case for preferring an appeal before the Supreme Court.
(2.) A. K. Ghosh, Director, Enforcement Directorate, Government of India, prayed for setting aside the Order No. 21 dated January 29, 1971, passed in case No.C/943 of 1970 by the Presidency Magistrate, Tenth Court, Calcutta. Opposite Party No.2, Dharam Chand Jain, was prosecuted under section 23F of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. The learned Magistrate discharged him under section 253(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by order No.21 dated January 29, 1972, holding that the proceeding was not maintainable and the materials on record were not sufficient to warrant any conviction.
(3.) Dharam Chand Jain, opposite party No.2, was one of the Directors of Messrs. Missiralal Dharam Chand Pvt. Ltd. An adjudication proceeding was started against the firm by the Director of Enforcement under sections 23(1)(a) and 23 (d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act after issuing a show-cause notice to Missiralal Jail, father of Dharam Chand Jain, as Director of Missiralal Dharam Chand Pvt Ltd. After Missiralal Jain entered appearance and had shown cause, Dharam Chand in his personal capacity appeared before the Director on September 30, 1968, pleaded guilty and alleged that the contraventions were due to ignorance of law and agreed to abide by the decision taken by the Director, Enforcement. The Director found Dharam Chand (not the firm of Missiralal) guilty having contravened the provision of section 4(1) read with sections 9 and 5(1)(i) of the Act, and imposed a penalty and directed repatriation of the foreign currency within one month. Thereafter, Dharam Chand paid Rs.20,000/- in cash towards the penalty. As regards the balance of penalty it was satisfied by repartition of a portion of the foreign exchange due to him. Dharam Chand, thereafter, informed the Director that in spite of his best efforts he could not repatriate the foreign exchange. Thereafter, a complaint was filed before the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, by the Union of India through T.N. Kaul, the then Assistant Director, Enforcement Directorate, against Dharam Chand for taking cognizance of the offence under section 23(F) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act and the Presidency Magistrate passed the order dated January 29, 1972.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.