S.MURALIDHAR
Satish Kumar Bhalla – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
1. The prayer in this petition is for discharge of the Petitioner in Complaint Case No. 294/1/2002 pending in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Metropoltian Magistrate; (ACMM), New Delhi under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1973 (FERA) read with Section 49 (3) and 49 (4) of the foreign Exchange Management Act 1999 (FEMA).
2. The aforementioned complaint has been filed by the Enforcement Directorate against M/s. Harshita Limited (presently Harshita Organics Limited) [Company] and six others including the Petitioner who is described therein as a Director of the said company. The allegation against the Company was that it had failed to realize the export proceeds equivalent to Rs. 4947.43 lakhs during the year 1997-98 and that the Company failed to furnish any permission of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for extension of the time for realization of the export proceeds. Accordingly, it was alleged in the complaint that the Company had contravened Sections 18 (2) and 18 (3) FERA.
3. As regards the Petitioner the only allegation in the complaint is contained in para 8 thereof which reads as under:
"8. That according to Section 68 (1) and (2) of F
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.