Unexplained delay in quasi-criminal FERA adjudication can vitiate proceedings where documents are withheld and no effective hearing is held.

In quasi-criminal adjudication under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, an inordinate and unexplained delay by the authorities, combined with failure to supply relied-upon documents and to conclude an effective hearing, can vitiate the proceeding. The analysis treats prolonged pendency as unfair where the delay is not attributable to the noticee, because keeping the charge unresolved for years causes prejudice and offends fair procedure and Article 21 protections against arbitrary deprivation of rights.

---

---

Issues: Whether the inordinate and unexplained delay in commencing and pursuing adjudication under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973, with no effective hearing or supply of relied-upon documents, justified quashing of the show cause notice and the consequential adjudication proceedings.

Analysis: The notice had been issued in 1991, but for many years no meaningful adjudication took place, no documents forming the basis of the charge were supplied despite repeated requests, and no hearing was concluded. The delay was not attributable to the petitioner, who consistently sought the material necessary to defend himself. In a proceeding of quasi-criminal character, prolonged pendency without explanation offends the requirement of fair procedure and the protection against arbitrary deprivation of rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The absence of diligence by the authorities, coupled with the prejudice caused by keeping the charge pending for decades, warranted intervention under the writ jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The unexplained delay vitiated the proceeding and the show cause notice was liable to be quashed in favour of the petitioner.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the adjudication proceeding was brought to an end because the prolonged, unexplained inaction of the authorities rendered continuation of the matter unjust.

Ratio Decidendi: In a quasi-criminal adjudication, an unexplained and inordinate delay attributable to the authorities, especially when necessary documents are withheld and no effective hearing is held, can justify quashing of the proceeding as violative of fair procedure and Article 21.

---