Quasi-judicial FERA proceedings cannot record a finding of guilt, though the penalty and remaining findings may stand.

FERA adjudicatory proceedings are quasi-judicial, not criminal, so the adjudicating authority may determine statutory contraventions and impose penalty but cannot record a criminal finding of guilt. A declaration of guilt carries consequences reserved for competent criminal courts, and the use of that term in the impugned order was therefore impermissible and had to be treated as redacted. The penalty and the remaining adjudicatory findings were upheld as being within jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the word "guilty" could be used in an order passed in FERA adjudicatory proceedings, and whether the finding describing the appellants as guilty for contraventions under FERA was liable to be redacted while the penalty was maintained.

Analysis: Proceedings under FERA are adjudicatory in nature and not criminal proceedings. The authority under the Act performs quasi-judicial functions to determine liability for breach of statutory obligations and to impose penalty, but it is not a criminal court empowered to record a finding of guilt for an offence. A declaration of guilt carries serious legal consequences and belongs to the domain of competent criminal courts. The penalty imposed by the appellate tribunal was otherwise within its jurisdiction and did not require interference.

Conclusion: The use of the word "guilty" in the impugned order was held to be impermissible and was directed to be treated as redacted. The penalty and the rest of the adjudicatory findings were upheld.

---