K.JAYACHANDRA REDDY, S.R.PANDIAN
Directorate Of Enforcement – Appellant
Versus
Deepak Mahajan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J.
The salient and indeed substantial legal question which looms for determination in this appeal may be formulated as follows:-
Whether a Magistrate before whom a person arrested under sub-section (1) of S. 35 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act of 1973 which is in pari materia with sub-section (1) of S. 104 of the Customs Act of 1962, is produced under sub-section (2) of S. 35 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, has jurisdiction to authorise detention of that person under S. 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
2. As a preclude to the judgment, we would like to state that though the appellant in the present case has been arrested under sub-section (1) of S. 35 of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the FERA) and taken to the Magistrate under sub-section (2) thereof, we while disposing the legal questions posed for determination, are inclined to deal with the corresponding provisions under the Customs Act also for the reasons -(i) that the scheme for both the FERA and the Customs Act is more or less the same; (ii)
referred to : Chaganti Satyanarayana v. State of A.P.
relied on : Hussainara Khatoon v. Home secretary, State of Bihar
referred to : A. Lakshmanarao v. Judicial Magistrate, Parvatipuram
Gouri Shankar Jha v. State of Bihar
Matabar Parida v. State of orissa
relied on : Niranjan Singh v. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab
distinguished : Ramesh Chandra Mehta v. State of W.B.
Illias v. Collector of Customs, Madras
M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi
Raja Narayanlal Bansilal v. Maneck Phiroz Mistry
State of Bombay v. Kathi Kalu Oghad
State of U.P. v. Deoman Upadhyaya
Veera Ibrahim v. State of Maharashtra
Poolpandi v. Superintendent, central Excise
Percy Rustomji Basta v. State of Maharashtra
Ramanlal Bhogilal Shah v. D.K. Guha
H.N. Rishbud v. State of Delhi
distinguished : Ramesh Chandra Mehta v. State of W.B.
Illias v. Collector of Customs, Madras
Badku Joti Savant v. State of Mysore
relied on : Vishwa Mitter of Vijay Bharat Cigarette Stores v. O.P. Poddar
A.R. Antulay v. Ramdas Sriniwas Nayak
Delhi Administration v. Ram Singh
referred to : M. Pentiah v. Muddala Veeramallappa
Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa
Organo Chemical Industries v. Union of India
Chairman, Board of Mining Examination and Chief Inspector of Mines v. Ramjee
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.