Retracted confession alone cannot sustain FERA penalty without independent corroboration; adjudication set aside.

A retracted confessional statement, standing alone, cannot sustain penal action under FERA unless it is substantially corroborated by independent and cogent evidence. The Tribunal found that the only material against the appellant was an earlier confession later retracted, and the record disclosed no independent evidence linking the appellant to the alleged transactions or the relevant NRE account. In the absence of corroboration, the penalty was unsustainable. The adjudication order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty under FERA could be sustained solely on the basis of a retracted confessional statement, without independent corroboration.

Analysis: The appeal challenged the adjudication order imposing penalty for alleged contraventions under FERA. The decisive circumstance was that the only material relied upon against the appellant was the confessional statement recorded earlier and retracted shortly thereafter. The Tribunal noted that a retracted confession, by itself, cannot safely form the foundation of penal action unless it is substantially corroborated by independent and cogent evidence. The record did not disclose any independent material connecting the appellant with the alleged transactions or with the concerned NRE account, and the alleged statement was not supported by corroborative evidence.

Conclusion: The penalty could not be sustained on the basis of the retracted confession alone, and the finding was in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The adjudication order was set aside and the appeal was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted confession cannot be the sole basis for penal adjudication unless it is substantially corroborated by independent and cogent evidence.

---