Back
SHAMPA DUTT (PAUL)
N. Lakshminarayan – Appellant
Versus
Enforcement Officer, Enforcement Directorate – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.)
1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of proceedings in Case No.C-2481/2002 pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 11th Court, Calcutta under Sections 56 and 68 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973.
2. The petitioner's case is that the complaint was filed by the opposite party on 31st May, 2002.
3. That in the complaint, ITC Limited (hereinafter referred to as “the Company”), a company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 2013 having its registered office at 37, J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata 700071(hereinafter referred to as “the Company”) was arraigned as Accused no.1 and the petitioner herein was arraigned as accused no.7.
4. The complaint was filed for alleged contravention of Section 8(1) and 9(1)(a) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) by the Company under Section 56 of the Act.
5. The petitioner and other individuals working for the Company were made vicariously liable for the alleged contravention of the Act by the Company by virtue of Section 68 of the Act.
6. That prior to the filing of the Complaint against the Company and the other individuals
Criminal proceedings are unsustainable if the accused have been exonerated in prior adjudicative proceedings, reflecting an abuse of court process, as established under FERA.
Vicarious liability cannot be imposed on directors solely by virtue of their positions; specific allegations of wrongdoing must exist for criminal liability to be established.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the special nature of the provisions of The Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007, and the principles of vicarious liability, as well as the lim....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for proper representation of a company in trial proceedings, as provided in Section 305 of the Companies Act, 1956, and the liab....
Pending appeals do not suspend the obligation to comply with penalty orders under FERA, allowing for criminal prosecution.
The court emphasized that the provisions of the Act of 2007 are special and should not be equated with the NI Act. It held that the complainant's specific averments were sufficient to proceed with th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a criminal complaint lacking merit and based on a civil dispute, as well as a complaint rendered infructuous due to the liquidation of the com....
The specific averments in a complaint against a director, as a person in charge of the company's affairs, may be sufficient to make out a case against the director, and the question of liability shou....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
