FPA-FE-76/DLI/2005 of Shri Nemi Chand Jain v/s The Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

ATFP28 Mar 2019FPA-FE-76/DLI/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The tribunal is informed that appellants Vikram Singh and Prakash Chand Yadav were acquitted by the Special Court, while Nemi Chand Jain died. The respondent's newly appointed counsel requests time to examine the acquittal judgment. The order grants a two-week adjournment for the respondent before listing the matter. No decision on merits is rendered in this order.

What the court decided

AI extract

FPA-FE-76/DLI/2005 of Shri Nemi Chand Jain v/s The Special… — Service and Employment | ATFP (2019)

¶1

APPELLATE TRIBUNAL FOR SAFEMA, FEMA, PMLA, NDPS & PBPT ACT AT NEW DELHI

¶2

1. FPA-FE-718/DLI/2005 Shri Vikram Singh	… Appellant
2. FPA-FE-76/DLI/2005
Shri Nemi Chand Jain	… Appellant
3. FPA-FE-77/DLI/2005
Shri Vikram Singh	… Appellant
Versus
The Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi	… Respondent

¶3

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶4

For the appellant : Ms. Mohini Chauhan & Sh. Santosh Chaurrihaa, Advocates For the respondent : Shri Kaushlesh Pandey, Legal Consultant 4. FPA-FE-311/DLI/2005 Shri Prakash Chandra Yadav … Appellant Versus The Special Director Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi … Respondent

¶5

Advocates/Authorized Representatives who appeared

¶6

For the appellant :	Shri Pavan Narang, Advocate Shri Amit Mishra, Advocate
For the respondent :	Shri Kaushlesh Pandey, Legal Consultant
CORAM
JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH	: CHAIRMAN
SHRI G.C. MISHRA	: MEMBER

¶7

FPA-FE-718, 76-77 & 311/DLI/2005

¶8

Page 1 of 3

¶9

ORDER 08.03.2019

¶10

FPA-FE- 718, 76-77 & 311/DLI/2005

¶11

We have been informed by the learned counsel for the appellants that Sh. Vikram Singh and Sh. Prakash Chand Yadav have already been acquitted by the Special Court. Copy of the judgement is placed on record. As to Sh. Nemi Chand Jain is concerned, he has died.

¶12

The learned counsel for the respondent seeks some time to examine the same from the department as he has been very recently appointed in the panel of respondent as a Legal Consultant.

¶13

The learned counsel for the appellant has produced the photocopy of the judgement passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Court, New Delhi in old case no. 847/1/02 as new case no. 42/1/44 dated 30.11.2017, in which the following findings are referred:-

¶14

The same are read as under.

¶15

“It has also come on record that during the testimony of complainant witnesses i.e. of Mr. R.K.Rawal that the money has not been sent into India through Hawala, but has come through banking channel into the account of Akbar Veerji and admitted that the account opened by him in India in NRE account and a person residing abroad having Indian nationality or any nationality could open an NRE account in India and that the funds from the NRE account could be taken back to the country or it could be encashed in India by cash or through cheque. It is further admitted by Sh. K.C. Abraham during his crossexamination dated 07.03.2007, that the transactions out of NRE account were in Indian rupees and were made in India and payments were made by cheque. It is further seen that the NRI account was maintained in an Indian bank. It is now pertinent to mention Section 8 (I) of FERA, 1973, which is as under:-

¶16

FPA-FE-718, 76-77 & 311/DLI/2005

¶17

Page 2 of 3

¶18

Restrictions on dealing in foreign exchange—

¶19

Except with the previous general or special permission of the Reserve Bank, no person other than an authorized dealer shall in India, and no person resident in India other than an authorized dealer shall outside India, purchase or otherwise acquire or borrow from, or sell, or otherwise transfer or lend to or exchange with, any person not being an authorized dealer, any foreign exchange: Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall apply to any purchase or sale of foreign currency effected in India between any person and a moneychanger. Explanation – For the purposes of this sub-section, a person, who deposits foreign exchange with another person or opens an account in foreign exchange with another person, shall be deemed to lend foreign exchange to such other person.”

¶20

The learned counsel for the appellants further states that since the complainant himself has made the statements before the court that the money has not been brought to India through Hawala, but has come through banking channel into the account of Akbar Veerji, thus the appeals are liable to be allowed.

¶21

Copy of the order has been handed over to the learned counsel for the respondent who seeks some time to see the same. Two weeks time is granted to the learned counsel for the respondent to examine.

¶22

List on 24^th April, 2019.

¶23

(Justice Manmohan Singh) Chairman

¶24

(G.C. Mishra) Member

¶25

New Delhi, 28^th March, 2019

¶26

¶27

FPA-FE-718, 76-77 & 311/DLI/2005

¶28

Page 3 of 3

FPA-FE-76/DLI/2005 of Shri Nemi Chand Jain v/s The Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

FPA-FE-76/DLI/2005 of Shri Nemi Chand Jain v/s The Special Director, Directorate of Enforcement, Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases