TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 1465
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter described as FERA) for violation of Section 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d) and 63 of the said Act. One D.N. Poddar in his official capacity as Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Directorate of FERA lodged a complaint before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta alleging, inter alia, that on 24th April, 1996, on the basis of a source information the officers of the Enforcement Directorate conducted a search at the residence and office of the respondent and recovered Indian currency notes amounting to Rs. 21.80 lakhs. They also seized some other documents under proper seizure list at the spot in presence of independent witnesses. It is further stated by the complainant that in pursuance to a notice under Section 40 of FERA the accus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m. Subsequently, trial of the case commenced. During trial three witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant. The accused was examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He also adduced evidence as D.W.1. It is the specific defence of the accused that he was engaged in construction business at the relevant point of time. He was developing a plot of land by raising construction. The amount which was seized by the officers of the Enforcement Directorate was earned by him by carrying on construction business. The learned Magistrate on consideration of the evidence on record and the respective cases of the parties held that the complainant failed to establish the charge against the accused and, therefore, he passed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tted by Mr. Roy that the accused undoubtedly retracted from his previous confessional statement in course of his examination under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On the other hand, he took a specific plea that he earned the said money which was seized by construction business. According to Mr. Roy, when the accused took the specific alibi of receipt of money from construction business and not as commission for foreign exchange in violation of FERA, it was the duty of the accused to prove such alibi during trial of the case. However, the accused failed to discharge his prudence to prove such alibi. Learned trial Judge acquitted the accused relying on the defence plea that the accused had earned the seized money by construc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e alibi which he took during trial after retracting his previous confessional statement. Thus, it is submitted by Mr. Roy, Learned Counsel for the appellant that the Learned Magistrate erred both in law and fact in recording the order of acquittal in favour of the respondent. The Learned Advocate for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that the case of the complainant was that a sum of Rs. 21.80 lakh was seized from the possession of the accused in presence of independent witnesses. During trial, prosecution failed to examine in all the independent witnesses to prove search and seizure. The offence under FERA is essentially based upon search and seizure of currency notes. Under such circumstances, non-examination of independent wi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....payment of Indian currency notes to various persons and received commission at the rate of Rs. 200/- per one lakh. In order to prove such offence under Section 9(1)(a) of the said Act it was incumbent upon the complainant to produce the persons to whom such payment was allegedly made. The complainant did not take any attempt to produce the persons to whom payment was allegedly made by the accused persons under the instruction of three Bangladeshi nationals. Prosecution case is entirely based on confessional statement. It is submitted by Mr. Roy that the accused not only made the confessional statement before the Enforcement Directorate but he made a statement in writing where he clearly admits his guilt. It is needless to say that the au....