Foreign exchange contraventions proved by confession and corroboration, with penalty reduced for inadequate support on one charge.

A confessional statement admitting receipt of foreign exchange, not having been retracted, was treated as voluntary and reliable evidence of contravention under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973. The recovery of Singapore dollars from the premises, read with the corresponding statement, was accepted as mutually corroborative and sufficient to establish the section 8(1) violation. The monetary penalty for the section 9(1)(b) contravention was found inadequately supported on the record and was substantially reduced, while the penalty for the section 8(1) contravention was maintained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the contraventions under sections 9(1)(b) and 8(1) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 were established and, if so, whether the penalty imposed required reduction.

Analysis: The confessional statement regarding receipt of foreign exchange was not retracted and was treated as voluntary and reliable for proving contravention. The recovery of Singapore dollars from the premises and the corresponding statement were accepted as mutually corroborative for the charge under section 8(1). However, the quantum of the monetary penalty for the section 9(1)(b) contravention was found to lack adequate assurance on the record, warranting substantial reduction.

Conclusion: The contraventions under sections 9(1)(b) and 8(1) were sustained, but the penalty for the first contravention was reduced to Rs. 25,000 while the penalty of Rs. 500 for the second contravention was maintained.

---