https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257753 Cognizance for an offence under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act could not be validly taken unless the pre-complaint opportunity under Section 61(2) was first given to the accused and the Magistrate recorded satisfaction that the statutory condition had been met. The complaint here was filed before expiry of the time granted in the notice, and the record did not show proper service or satisfactory proof that the notice had been duly served and considered. As the mandatory pre-cognizance requirement was not complied with, the summoning order and cognizance were held without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. en-us Wed, 18 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257753 Cognizance for an offence under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act could not be validly taken unless the pre-complaint opportunity under Section 61(2) was first given to the accused and the Magistrate recorded satisfaction that the statutory condition had been met. The complaint here was filed before expiry of the time granted in the notice, and the record did not show proper service or satisfactory proof that the notice had been duly served and considered. As the mandatory pre-cognizance requirement was not complied with, the summoning order and cognizance were held without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. Case-Laws FEMA Wed, 18 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257753