2018 (5) TMI 1530

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e is not an authorised dealer in foreign exchange in India. The adjudicating authority has substantiated this charge relying on some fax message received from DIG Police (Operations) Gujarat State, Ahmedabad and statements of Shri Usman Gani Noor Mohammad Merchant @ Munna Abdulla where the adjudicating authority states that these documents reveal the name of the noticee Shri Farooque Memon Navsari appearing on pages 22, 23 & 24 of the fax message. The details of the same are as under: a) Sr.No. 256 Farooque Memon Navsari Madina $27778 10,00,000 @36 ,, b) Sr.No. $14085 Farooque Memon Navsari 5, @35/50 ,, c) Sr.No. Farooque Memon Navsari   2. The appellant has filed this appeal against the impugned order of the Specia....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the accused/applicant in a judicial custody. Hon'ble Court from 10.10.1994 till today given sufficient time. In spite of that prosecution side fails to prove the difference (between) Farooque Abdul Gaffar Mithawala and Memon. Looking to this position as per my views...... complainant side not establish any written evidence or any connection....... In my opinion there is no any strong prima facie case against the accused Farooque Abdul Gaffar Mithawala...... and it is very much clear that against the accused there is no case against him under the provisions of FERA. In that circumstances, to keep accused in a judicial custody is not just and proper and if he released on bail it is just and proper....." 4. The respondent reiterated the argu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the adjudicating authority has intermittently used the name of Farooque Mithawala and Farooque Memon or Farooque Mithawala @ Memon without giving any clarification as to who the real person is or the identity of the actual offender. It appears that no effort has been made either by the investigating agency or the adjudicating authority to establish the identity of the actual offender. The statement of Mr. Usman Ghani relied upon does not implicate Farooque Mithawala. It implicates Farooque Memon but nowhere throws any light as to whether Farooque Memon and Farooque Mithawala are one and the same person. The documents seized from Shri Usmani contains details of remittance into India for an amount of Rs. 7,01,89,050 otherwise than through an ....