Disposed

M/S Sitaram Jindal Foundation v. the Deputy Secretary

Karnataka HC23 Jan 2026WP/39055/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A charitable foundation challenged a notice requiring it to compound offences under Rule 21 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules 2011 before registration renewal. The court disposed of the petition, allowing a representation with documents to show no foreign contribution was received, deferring notice proceedings until due consideration.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to file representation within four weeks; impugned notice proceedings deferred until due consideration.

M/S Sitaram Jindal Foundation Vs the Deputy… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2026

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 39055 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

Digitally signed by VANAMALA N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

M/S SITARAM JINDAL FOUNDATION 16^TH KM, TUMKUR ROAD JINDAL NAGAR, BENGALURU 560 073, KARNATAKA. NATURE OF BUSINESS CHARITABLE, PROVIDING SCHOLARSHIPS TO MERITORIOUS AND NEEDY STUDENTS ACROSS INDIA FOREIGN CONTRIBUTION (REGULATION) ACT, 1976 REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE, SRI. DHIRAJ SINGH, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O. SRI. OMPAL SINGH THAKUR,

¶11

…PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. S PARTHASARATHI.,ADVOCATE A/W SMT. JINITA CHATRJEE.,ADVOCATE)

¶13

¶14

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶15

HC-KAR

¶16

AND:

¶17

THE DEPUTY SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FOREIGNERS DIVISION, (FCRA WING) NATIONAL STADIUM, NEAR PRAGATI MAIDAN NEW DELHI-110001.

¶18

THE JOINT DIRECTOR (FCRA) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, FOREIGNERS DIVISION, (FCRA WING) MDCNS, INDIA GATE, NEW DELHI-110 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. KUMAR M N.,ADVOCATE FOR R1 & R2)

¶21

THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TOA) QUASHING THE NOTICE RECEIVED THROUGH E-MAIL DATED 20.11.2025 ISSUED BY THE 1^ST RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-H); B) DIRECTING THE 2^ND RESPONDENT TO GRANT RENEWAL OF REGISTRATION UNDER SECTION 16 OF THE ACT DATED 29.08.2025 (ANNEXURE-G); C) ISSUE A WRIT OF PROHIBITION RESTRAINING THE 1^ST RESPONDENT TO PROCEED FURTHER IN PURSUANCE OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED THROUGH E-MAIL DATED 20.11.2025 (ANNEXURE- H).

¶22

¶23

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶24

HC-KAR

¶25

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD

¶27

ORAL ORDER

¶28

The petitioner is aggrieved by the Notice issued by the Deputy Secretary, Foreigners Division (FCRA Wing), Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, and the petitioner is informed by this impugned notice that, upon scrutiny, certain irregularities as enumerated in the notice are observed and that if the petitioner intends to compound the offence constituted by such irregularities may apply to the Ministry under Rule 21 of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Rules 2011 [FCRR 2011] within 30 days of issuance of this notice.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶31

HC-KAR

¶32

Sri Kumar M.N., a learned Standing

¶33

Counsel who is permitted to enter appearance for the first and second respondents accepting the Memo of Appearance filed, submits that the petitioner cannot have any objections with this communication because the petitioner's revision application has been allowed by the competent authority subject to the condition that if any foreign contribution is received or utilized during the intervening period without a valid registration, the relevant office must compound the offence before disposing of the revision application. Sri M. N. Kumar submits that the petitioner has not placed these circumstances or documents to support these circumstances before the competent authority.

¶34

Sri.S.Parthasarathi in refutal underscores

¶35

the following.

¶36

¶37

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

[a] The petitioner has not received any foreign contribution from the year 2017 till the renewal of the registration in the month of May 2025, and the amount in the petitioner's

¶40

account is an accumulation from the investments made earlier or from other contributions.

¶41

[b] If the petitioner has not received any foreign contribution during the afore intervening period, the notice lacks jurisdiction.

¶42

This Court has considered these

¶43

circumstances. If the petitioner has received any financial contribution during the relevant period, despite its protestation as aforesaid, an offence is constituted, and that could also be a cause for compounding under Rules 21 of FCRR 2011. There should be comprehensive proceedings for compounding instead of two separate proceedings.

¶44

¶45

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶46

HC-KAR

¶47

As such, this Court is of the view that the Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Foreigners Division [FCRA Wing], Government of India must first examine whether the petitioner could be justified in the stand as is presented before the petitioner can be called upon to file an application under Rule 21 of the FCRR 2011 and as such, the following:

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The petition stands disposed of reserving liberty to the petitioner to file a representation with the competent authority [Foreigners' Division (FCRA Wing), Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India within four [4] weeks from today along with the documents to substantiate its case that it has not received any foreign contributions during the relevant period observing that if the petitioner, in exercise of this liberty, files such representation and documents, the proceedings in terms of the

¶50

¶51

NC: 2026:KHC:4036 WP No. 39055 of 2025

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

impugned notice dated 20.11.2025 [ AnnexureH ] shall be deferred until there is such due

¶54

consideration.

¶55

SD/(B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE

¶56

SA ct:sr

M/S Sitaram Jindal Foundation v. the Deputy Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Sitaram Jindal Foundation v. the Deputy Secretary

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

Smt. Akkamma Vs Mysuru Urban Development Authority

Sri B S Shantha Kumar Vs the State of Karnataka

Vanivilas Cements Private Limited Vs Mr. Sharatchandra Medisetty

Sri. Faisal Chaka Vs Union of India

Northroof Ventures Private Limited Vs Reserve Bank of India

Mohana G K Vs State of Karnataka