Pre-trial quashing declined where evidence was partly recorded and compounding and circular claims could be raised at final arguments.

Proceedings to quash the orders requiring the petitioner to face trial under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act were declined at the pre-trial stage because evidence had already been partly recorded and the remaining evidence was still pending. The Court held that the legality of the impugned orders and the asserted circular could not be tested before the trial concluded, especially since the circular's existence and applicability were still unestablished. The petitioner was permitted to raise the same pleas before the trial court at final arguments, and the challenge was not decided on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the proceedings and impugned orders should be quashed at the pre-trial stage in view of the asserted circular and the plea that the matter stood compounded.

Analysis: The petition challenged the orders directing the petitioner to face trial under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The Court noted that evidence of three out of six witnesses had already been recorded and that the remaining evidence was still to be taken. In these circumstances, the legality of the impugned orders was not required to be tested at that stage. The Court also observed that the existence and applicability of the circular relied upon by the petitioner were yet to be established, and that the petitioner's submissions could appropriately be examined after the evidence was led.

Conclusion: No interference was called for at this stage. The petition was disposed of with liberty to raise the same pleas before the trial court at final arguments.

Final Conclusion: The challenge was not adjudicated on merits and the petitioner was left free to agitate the questions raised before the trial court in the pending criminal proceedings.

---