Retracted statement corroboration: substantial independent evidence can sustain foreign exchange contravention findings and lawful confiscation.

Findings address alleged contraventions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act concerning unauthorized outward remittances, purchase of foreign exchange from non authorised persons, and seizure/confiscation of currency. The adjudicator relied on recorded statements, documentary and physical recoveries, call records and interrelated premises searches; retractions were rejected as belated. The governing principle applied is that a retracted confession may be acted upon when its inculpatory content is substantially corroborated by independent, cogent evidence, and absence of credible licensed acquisition records supported the conclusion that transactions were not legitimate. On that basis the impugned contravention findings, penalties and confiscation were sustained and the appeal dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the findings of contravention of Sections 3(a), 3(b) and 3(c) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, and the consequent imposition of penalties and confiscation of Indian and foreign currency in the Impugned Order are justified and liable to be interfered with on appeal.

Analysis: The appeal challenges the factual and legal basis for the adjudication that payments and receipt of funds were arranged to effect remittances abroad outside authorised banking channels, the purchase of foreign exchange from persons other than authorised dealers, and the seizure/confiscation of Indian and foreign currency. The material before the adjudicating authority included multiple recorded statements by the noticee taken on several dates, detailed documentary recoveries from residential and office searches (currency, foreign currency, diaries, files and transaction records), corroborating telephone numbers and call records, and interrelated recoveries from associated premises. The statements were confirmed on subsequent dates and were supported by independent physical and documentary recoveries. Retractions were considered and rejected as belated and afterthoughts. The adjudicating findings addressed voluntariness and corroboration requirements for retracted statements and applied established principles that a retracted confession may be acted upon when substantially corroborated by independent and cogent evidence. The authority also assessed the absence of credible documentary proof to show licensed acquisition of the seized foreign exchange and evaluated the explanation of alleged legitimate transactions against the contemporaneous recoveries and call records. On that basis, the adjudicating findings on contraventions of Sections 3(a), 3(b) and 3(c), and on confiscation under Section 13(2), were held to be supported by evidence.

Conclusion: The findings of contravention under Sections 3(a), 3(b) and 3(c) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, the imposition of the penalties specified in the Impugned Order, and the confiscation of the seized Indian and foreign currency are upheld; the appeal is dismissed in favour of the respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: A retracted statement may be relied upon where its inculpatory content is substantially corroborated by independent and cogent documentary or material evidence, and such corroboration sustains findings of contravention and lawful confiscation under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999.

---