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%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the penalty for contravention of section 9(1)(d) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 could be sustained on the basis of a retracted confessional statement without adequate consideration of its voluntariness and corroboration.
Analysis: A statement recorded under the Act may be relied upon, but only if it is voluntary and survives judicial scrutiny after retraction. Prudence requires the authority to examine whether the statement was obtained by threat, coercion or other improper means and to apply its mind to the subsequent retraction before treating the inculpatory portion as reliable. Where the record does not show such consideration, reliance on the retracted confession is unsafe. In the present matter, the adjudicating authority did not demonstrate compliance with these requirements, and the finding was also unsupported by independent material sufficient to sustain the alleged contravention.
Conclusion: The penalty could not be sustained on the basis of the retracted confessional statement and the impugned order was liable to be set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: A retracted confession can support liability only if the authority independently satisfies itself that the statement was voluntary and sufficiently corroborated before acting on it.