The principle of parity in legal proceedings requires careful consideration of the specific circumstances of each case, and immunity under the relevant foreign exchange laws does not exempt from prosecution when statutory provisions apply.

JUDGMENT :

SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J.

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the order taking cognizance dated 31.05.2002 passed in Complaint Case C. III 85 of 2002 corresponding to FERA/FEMA 2/02 by which the cognizance for the offence under Sections 56 r/w Sections 49(3) and (4) of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 for contravention of the provisions of Section 9(i)(i)(a) and 9(b)(i) r/w Section 64(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act has been taken including the order dated 06.04.2023 by which the application filed under Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. has been rejected with all subsequent proceeding holding it to be illegal and without jurisdiction.

Factual Matrix:

2. The prosecution case, as it appears from the complaint filed by the prosecution stating therein that in pursuance to the orders passed by the Hon'ble High Court on 11.3.1996 and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 19.3.1996, the CBI, Patna Branch took the investigation of Doranda P.S. Case No. 50/1996 (RC Case No. 55/96) under Sections 1208, 409, 420, 467, 468, 472, 471 and 420 IPC and Section 13 (2) read with Section 13 (1) and (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It has been alleged that Dr. K.M. Prasad in conspiracy with others defrauded the government to the extent of Rs.7,09,92,000/- during the period 1980-1990 on the basis of fake allotment letters purportedly issued by the Director of Animal Husbandry, Govt. of Bihar for the purpose of medicines. As a matter of fact fake supplies were shown by the suppliers and the money was withdrawn on the basis of such fake allotment order was misappropriated by the accused persons.

3. It has further been stated that during the course of investigation, it was transpired that Dr. K.M. Prasad is also involved in RC Case No. 4A/96, which case is also under investigation and the amount defrauded in the above case is to the extent of Rs. 19,81,66,460 approx. as reported in the FIR. The investigation has also revealed that Dr. K.M. Prasad has acquired huge immovable and movable property in his own name and in the name of his children and other at different places.

4. On further enquiry, it was also revealed that Dr. K.M. Prasad and his son Kamlesh Kumar (petitioner herein) have been made accused in at least 14 and 8 cases respectively in the similar nature by the CBI and in most of the cases chargesheets have already been submitted by the CBI against Dr. K.M. Prasad and his son Kamlesh Kumar.

5. It has further been alleged that sons and daughter of Dr. K.M. Prasad had received certain foreign exchange remittances by way of foreign exchange instruments amounting in total US$ 3,15,000/- and pounds 1000 during the year 1991- 92 and on further information that the said remittances were not actually genuine gift amount but were suspected to be involved in violation of the provision of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act 1973 by certain persons involved in the animal husbandry scam of Bihar.

6. The Enforcement Directorate have made enquiry i