2018 (8) TMI 2162 - HC - Indian Laws

Society license renewal after thorough verification negates need for further Foreign Contribution Act investigation

A. Thiyaja Versus The Director (FCRA), The Superintendent of Police, Chennai, Dohnavur Fellowship, R. David Rajamanian, Tirunelveli, R. Ezekial Devairakkam and D.R. Jeremiah Rajanesan

A. Thiyaja Versus The Director (FCRA), The Superintendent of Police, Chennai, Dohnavur Fellowship, R. David Rajamanian, Tirunelveli, R. Ezekial ... Issues Involved:1. Alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 by a religious charitable society.2. Jurisdiction and authority of respondents to investigate the allegations.3. Locus standi of the petitioner in filing the writ petition.4. Renewal of registration under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Alleged Violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976:The petitioner sought a mandamus to direct respondents to complete the investigation against certain private parties for alleged violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976. The petitioner claimed that the society, established as a religious charitable entity, was receiving foreign contributions without proper registration and that the funds were misused. Despite representations made in 2003, the petitioner argued that no investigation had been conducted, necessitating the writ petition.2. Jurisdiction and Authority of Respondents to Investigate:The respondents, including the Assistant Solicitor General and Special Public Prosecutor (CBI), contended that the allegations pertained to private persons and did not involve public servants, thus falling outside the jurisdiction of the CBI. The 1st respondent, Ministry of Home Affairs, conducted inspections and found no violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act. The CBI further clarified that the complaints were forwarded to the Intelligence Bureau due to lack of jurisdiction, and no enquiry was conducted by them.3. Locus Standi of the Petitioner:The private parties argued that the petitioner lacked locus standi as he was neither a member nor an office bearer of the society. The petitioner's connection to the society was not established, and the writ petition was filed adversarially rather than in public interest. The court noted that the petitioner must establish his locus in any future legal endeavors.4. Renewal of Registration under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act:The private parties demonstrated that the society was duly registered under the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act and had its registration renewed periodically. The latest renewal was granted for five years starting from November 1, 2016, after thorough verification by the Ministry of Home Affairs. This renewal indicated that no adverse findings were made against the society, supporting the respondents' position that no violations occurred.Conclusion:The court concluded that the writ petition did not merit further consideration as the respondents had already addressed the petitioner's complaints. The investigation and renewal processes confirmed no violations of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act. The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner could pursue any further grievances through appropriate legal channels, provided he establishes the necessary locus standi. The petition was dismissed without costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.