Petitioner challenged the validity of Section 37 of FEMA. Court directed respondents to give prior notice if fresh summons issued. Petition disposed without deciding validity of Section 37.
Respondents to give prior notice for fresh summons; issue regarding validity of Section 37 kept open; earlier ad-interim relief vacated.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/4
GAHC010069962022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : W.P.(Crl.)/16/2022
ALIENBA PANGJUNG JAMIR
S/O. ALIENBA JAMIR, PERMANENT R/O. ASANGMA VILL- MOKOKCHUNG DISTRICT, NAGALAND, PRESENTLY RESIDING BELOW G. RIO SCHOOL, DIST. KOHIMA, NAGALAND.
VERSUS
REVENUE SECRETARY AND 3 ORS.
GOVT. OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPTT. OF REVENUE, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001.
2:DIRECTOR
DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT GOVT. OF INDIA HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 6TH FLOOR LOK NAYAK BHAWAN KHAN MARKET NEW DELHI-110003.
3:RAJ KUMAR RAM ASSTT. DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT GOVT. OF INDIA GUWAHATI ZONAL OFFICE-II GUWAHATI-781003.
4:UNION OF INDIA
REP. BY THE SECRETARY LEGISLATIVE DEPTT. MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE NEW DELHI-110001
Page No.# 2/4
Advocate for the Petitioner : S BORGOHAIN
Advocate for the Respondent : ASSTT.S.G.I.
BEFORE
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA
ORDER
12-09-2022
R.M. Chhaya, C.J.
Heard Mr. S. Borgohain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for the respondents.
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
a) Pass a Writ of Declaration or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring Section 37 of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, as void and inoperative for being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution;
b) And consequently, pass a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and/or setting aside the Summons being F.No. T- 3/GWZO-II/01/2021 (AD RKR)/1416 dated September 24, 2021 and being F. No. T-3/GWZO-II/01/2021 (AD RKR)/14161680 dated October 29, 2021 issued by the Respondent No. 3 to the petitioner;
c) Pass any such other writ or orders as it may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice;
d) In the interim, it is humbly prayed that the petitioner is prima facie able to show a case where the fundamental and statutory rights of the petitioner is violative. And hence, the petitioner makes out a case for grant of interim relief as balance of convenience is in the favour of the petitioner and hence prays before this Hon’ble Court to stop the further proceedings in connection with the
Page No.# 3/4
present petitioner in Summon dated being F. No. T-3/GWZO-II/01/2021 (AD RKR)/1416 dated September 24, 2021 and being F. No. T-3/GWZO-II/01/2021 (AD RKR)/14161680 dated October 29, 2021 and further direct the respondents to produce the relevant records as prayed (supra) on the next date. Of interim prayer not granted, the present petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury.
e) Pass any other order or direction that this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case.”
Considering the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondents, Mr. S. Borgohain,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly submits that as on date no fresh summons is issued by the respondent Department and that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate if any fresh summons is issued.
The learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the question of the validity of Section 37 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 may be kept open and the petitioner be permitted to raise all contentions before the authority in case if any fresh summons are issued.
In light of the aforesaid, it is provided that in case if any fresh summons is issued by the respondents authority under the relevant provisions of Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999, the respondents shall give appropriate prior notice so as to enable the petitioner to appear before him.
It would be open for the petitioner to take all contentions available under the law and disposal of this petition shall not in any manner prejudice the rights of both the parties.
It is, however, made clear that the issue regarding validity of Section 37 of the
Page No.# 4/4
Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 is kept open.
With the above observation, the petition is disposed of.
Ad-interim relief granted earlier shall stand vacated.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner shall be permitted to raise contentions regarding the validity of Section 37 of FEMA if fresh summons are issued.
Whether the interim relief granted earlier shall stand vacated.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Alienba Pangjung Jamir
Revenue Secretary
Director, Directorate of Enforcement
Raj Kumar Ram
Union of India
Soumitra Saikia
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
