TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the criminal complaints under section 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 deserved to be quashed on account of the small value of the foreign exchange involved, the prolonged pendency of the proceedings without framing of charge, and the resulting denial of a speedy trial.
Analysis: The proceedings had remained pending for about 22 years without even the framing of charge, although the amount of foreign exchange involved was only about Rs. 49,452 and the petitioners were advanced in age. The Court noted that section 56(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 itself created a gradation of punishment depending on the value involved, which showed that the gravity of the offence was linked to the amount in question. The Court further held that the long and unexplained delay, coupled with the limited value involved and the absence of meaningful progress, made continuation of the prosecution unjustified. The Court also observed that the petitioners' right to a speedy trial under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India had been violated, and that the continued pendency of the complaints would serve no useful purpose.
Conclusion: The complaints and all consequential proceedings were quashed in favour of the petitioners.
TaxTMI 
