The Accidental Lawyer and the Shadow of FERA

'Don't expect me to confess whether I did this or not.'

The sentence appears casually in a book that narrates events from the age of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. Yet it captures an entire era.

For those who did not live through those years, it may be difficult to understand the atmosphere that surrounded economic offences in India. Today, foreign exchange transactions are completed through mobile phones. Money moves across continents in seconds. Foreign travel is routine. International education is commonplace.

But there was a time when foreign exchange itself was treated almost as a national asset requiring protection.

That was the age of FERA.

Before proceeding further, a clarification may be necessary. During much of the period covered by these recollections, I served as an Inspector in the Customs and Central Excise Department. Owing to an inter-Commissionerate transfer, I remained in that rank for nearly twenty-two years. I was never part of the Enforcement Directorate, nor was I involved in the formulation of policies or major enforcement decisions under FERA. The observations recorded here are therefore not those of a policymaker or investigator. They are the recollections of a field officer who watched, from close quarters, how economic laws influenced ordinary lives.

FERA was born in a different India.

India of the 1960s and 1970s was a nation struggling with shortages. Foreign exchange reserves were precious. Imports were tightly controlled. Economic self-reliance was a national objective rather than a political slogan. In that environment, every dollar that left the country was viewed as something that affected the national economy.

The law reflected that philosophy.

To a generation raised in the liberalised economy after 1991, many provisions of FERA may appear extraordinary. Permissions were required for activities that would today attract little attention. Foreign currency possession, overseas remittances, foreign investments and cross-border transactions were regulated with remarkable intensity.

The law was feared.

But like most feared laws, the fear was often larger than the reality.

In the public imagination, FERA acquired an almost mythical status. Businessmen whispered about it. Travellers worried about it. Professionals discussed it cautiously. The mere mention of the statute was often enough to change the tone of a conversation.

For many citizens, the law existed less as a legal text and more as a psychological presence.

Looking back, what fascinates me is not the law itself but the people who lived under it.

The businessman who carried files thicker than telephone directories.

The traveller who carefully preserved every foreign exchange receipt.

The customs officer trying to distinguish between a genuine mistake and a deliberate violation.

The middle-class family sending a child abroad and anxiously navigating regulatory procedures.

The countless ordinary individuals who found themselves confronting rules they scarcely understood.

Every law creates its own ecosystem of anxieties.

FERA was no exception.

Yet history teaches us an interesting lesson. Laws are often products of their time.

The India that enacted FERA was not the India that eventually repealed it.

Economic liberalisation transformed the country. The assumptions that justified stringent foreign exchange controls gradually weakened. Foreign investment became desirable. International trade expanded. Global integration replaced isolation.

Eventually, FERA gave way to the more facilitative regime of FEMA.

The change was more than legislative.

It represented a shift in national thinking.

FERA was founded on control.

FEMA was founded on management.

FERA viewed foreign exchange as something to be guarded.

FEMA viewed it as something to be facilitated and regulated.

The transition mirrored India's broader economic journey.

When I look back today, I do not see villains and heroes.

I see a generation.

A generation of citizens trying to comply with a complicated regulatory framework.

A generation of officers attempting to enforce laws created in a different economic context.

A generation of policymakers responding to challenges as they understood them.

History often judges old laws harshly because it compares them with present realities.

That comparison is not always fair.

FERA must be judged in the context of the India that produced it.

Whether one agrees with its philosophy or not, it remains an important chapter in the country's economic history.

And perhaps that is why the sentence quoted at the beginning continues to resonate.

'Don't expect me to confess whether I did this or not.'

It reflects more than individual caution.

It reflects an era.

An era when economic regulation was not merely about numbers, accounts and currencies.

It was about national priorities, public perceptions, administrative power and the uneasy relationship between the citizen and the State.

That era has passed.

But for those who witnessed it, even from the sidelines, the memories remain remarkably vivid.

---

By Adv. G. Jayaprakash(Former Central Excise Officer)