Partly allowed

Satya Prakash Bagla v. Directorate of Enforcement

Delhi HC4 Jul 2024W.P.(C)/7287/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi partially entertained a writ petition challenging a summons under FEMA that sought information from the petitioner's family. The Court directed the Respondent to amend the summons to exclude family information while requiring the petitioner to comply with the revised annexure regarding his own and company affairs.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to answer the revised Annexure-A excluding information pertaining to his wife, daughter, and son within four weeks.

Satya Prakash Bagla Vs Directorate of Enforcement — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~7

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 7287/2024

¶4

SATYA PRAKASH BAGLA

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. D.P. Singh, Mr. Archit Singh, Mr. Ambar Tewari, Mr. Monu Mishra, Mr. Devesh Bhatia, Mr. Varun Aggarwal, Advocates.

¶7

versus

¶8

DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT .....Respondent Through: Mr. Ravi Prakash, CGSC with Mr. Ali Khan, Advocate.

¶9

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA

¶10

¶11

O R D E R 04.07.2024

¶12

Mr. Satya Prakash Bagla, the Managing Director of M/s Exclusive Motors Pvt. Ltd., has received summons bearing No. FEMA/SUMMON/DLZO2/2024/229 dated 03.05.2024,¹ issued by Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement, for furnishing information in respect of investigation being carried out under Section 37(1) and Section 37(3) of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999,² read along with Section 131(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Section 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶13

The Petitioner’s grievance is that the Annexure A to the impugned summons, require the Petitioner to produce documents pertaining the family members which he is not legally bound to do. The Petitioner contends that the Respondent while investigating into the alleged violations of FEMA, cannot seek information pertaining to the Petitioner’s wife, daughter and son through the

¶14

1 “Impugned summons.”

¶15

2 “FEMA”

¶16

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 22/07/2024 at 15:46:41

¶17

impugned summons. It is contended that firstly, the Petitioner cannot assess such information and secondly, such an access would breach their privacy.

¶18

During the pendency of the present proceedings, the Respondents have filed an affidavit, in compliance of the order dated 21^st May, 2024, and enclosed therewith is Annexure R-2,³ which now supersedes the Annexure A, accompanying the summons, which is the subject matter of the challenge in the present petition. 4. Counsel for the Petitioner states that the revised annexure continues to be arbitrary and unreasonable as it seeks information which is not permissible in law. No information such as ITR or other financial record of the Petitioner’s wife/daughter/son can be sought from him. Furthermore, it is also pointed out that the Petitioner is divorced from his wife, and he no longer has any familial relationship with the children.

¶19

Having considered the aforenoted circumstances and considering the fact that the proceedings are at initial stage where only summons have been issued, although the Court is not inclined to entertain the present petition, however, there is merit in the Petitioner’s contentions to the extent that the information that can be sought by the Respondent has to be confined to the Petitioner and M/s Exclusive Motors Pvt. Ltd. or its sister concerns/wholly owned subsidiaries. No information from the Petitioner can be sought pertaining to his wife, daughter and son who have their independent rights.

¶20

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of with the directions that the revised Annexure-A, accompanying the affidavit dated 27^th May, 2024, filed by the Respondent, shall be answered by the Petitioner except for the information pertaining to Petitioner’s family members, i.e., wife/daughter/son. This condition shall be read in Clauses 3,4,6, and 9. The petitioner shall join the investigation and furnish the information in respect of revised ‘Annexure A’, as directed above,

¶21

3 “revised Annexure-A”

¶22

¶23

within a period of four weeks from today. All rights and contentions of parties are left open.

¶24

It is however clarified that in case the Respondent were to suspect that the Petitioner’s family members are also in violation of the provisions of FEMA, they shall be fully entitled to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.

¶25

With the above directions, the present petition is disposed of.

¶26

SANJEEV NARULA, J

¶27

JULY 4, 2024 ab

¶28

Satya Prakash Bagla v. Directorate of Enforcement

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Prakash Bagla v. Directorate of Enforcement

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Saspal Singh Vs Punjab and Sind Bank and Anr.

Datta Power Infra Private Limited Vs Solar Energy Corporation of India & Ors.

Rekha Shetty Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Hemant Bhardwaj Vs National E Assessment Centre & Ors.

Fareed Khan Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Anr.

Ambica Steels Limited (through Director) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle 1(1) Delhi & Ors.

Ambica Steels Limited (through Director) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Delhi & Ors.

Ambica Steels Limited (through Director) Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1(1) Delhi & Ors.

Managing Director Army Welfare Housing Organization & Ors. Vs Col Kashmir Chand (Retd)

M/S. Creative Entrepreneurs LLP Vs Union of India

Soni Vs Naresh Kumar Rastogi & Anr.

Saaduzzaman Vs Government of NCT of Delhi

Sh. Rehan Elahi & Anr. Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sanjay Gupta & Anr. Vs Office of Sub-Registrar, Kashmere Gate, Central District, Delhi