2003 (3) TMI 782

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d with section 64(2) for making attempt to the above amount to disburse various persons in India under instructions from abroad. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under : On 20-7-1987, the Anti-Dacoity Squad of Western Range Police, Karnataka, while checking vehicles at Padubidri, apprehended a lorry bearing No. CSU 505 with the passengers by name S/Shri R.M. Khaleel and Fazulur Rahiman of Bhatkal, and on a search recovered Indian Currency of Rs. 6,12,855 along with other documents. A case was registered in the Shirva Police Station under Crime No. 67/87 and further investigation was carried out. Shri R.M. Khaleel gave a statement dated 21-7-1987 before the police authorities in which he has inter alia deposed that after completion o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bidri by Police, that on seeing the police he and Fazulur Rahiman took to their heels but were chased and caught by the police who later seized the money and documents from them, and that seized chits containing names and addresses of the parties were given to him by Nizamuddin requesting him to pay amounts as detailed in those chits to the respective parties. 3. Khaleel and Fazulur Rahiman were later arrested by the police and produced before the court and were released on bail. Since investigation conducted by the police revealed that the case pertained to violation of FERA, they transferred the case records to the Enforcement Directorate, Bangalore for further investigation. Attempts made by the Enforcement Directorate, Bangalore to con....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion. Statement in isolation could not have been made the basis of the guilt. He further contended that though strict rules of evidence are not applicable to FERA violations it does not mean that all aspects could be presumed in which case it would be merely a hypothesis and conjecture not permissible in law. There was no evidence that the appellant was making payment on behalf of persons resident outside India. The learned counsel has relied upon Shanti Prasad Jain v. Director of Enforcement AIR 1962 SC 1764 wherein it was observed as follows : "It is observed that the proceeding under the Act are quasi-criminal in nature and it is the duty of the respondent as prosecutor to make out beyond all reasonable doubt that there has been a ....