Professional Documents
Culture Documents
APPELLANT
VERSUS
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE,
MIN. OF FINANCE
...RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
and order
Requisite
on 19 th
Page 2 of 16
The
appellant
Magistrate
challenged
the
order
of
the
The
Page 3 of 16
appellant
in
relation
to
summons
7th
October,
1989,
8th
November,
2009
Page 4 of 16
learned
senior
counsel
for
the respondent.
6.
the
complaint
could
be
withdrawn.
question
whether
the
non
However,
compliance
was
Learned
which were not gone into by the High Court may also
be seen. The complaint was filed on 8 th March, 2000.
Page 5 of 16
in
the
circumstances
High
of
the
Court),
case
this
Court
ought
in
to
the
quash
Page 6 of 16
may be
Gazetted
Officer
of
shall have power to
person whose attendance
necessary either to give
to produce a document
Page 7 of 16
Page 8 of 16
Page 9 of 16
dated 21 st
follows :
3.
That the complainant issued a
summons dated 21.12.1999 under Section
40 of FERA, 1973 in connection with the
impending
investigations
for
the
appearance of the accused on 3.1.2000 but
the same have been returned back by the
postal
authorities
with
the
remarks
refused.
It is submitted that the accused has
deliberately avoided his appearance before
the Investigating Officer and on account of
his
non
co-operative
attitude
the
investigation has come to a standstill.
4.
It is respectfully submitted that the
accused has been intentionally avoiding his
appearance
before
the
Enforcement
Directorate knowing fully well that non
compliance of the directions made under
Section 40 of the Act renders the person
liable for prosecution in a Court of law under
Section 56 of the Act which is a non-bailable
offence. It is further submitted that by
virtue of Section 40(3) of the Act, the
accused was bound to appear before the
Officers of the Enforcement Directorate in
the best interest of investigation. Section
40(3) is reproduced below for kind perusal
and ready reference to this Honble Court :
Section 40(3) :
10
Page 10 of 16
(3)
All persons so summoned shall be
bound to attend either in person or by
authorised agents, as such officer may
direct; and all persons so summoned shall
be bound to state the truth upon any
subject respecting which they are examined
or make statements and produce such
documents as may be required.
It is respectfully submitted that non
compliance of any rule, directions or law is
punishable under Section 56 of the Act. The
accused willfully failed to appear before the
Enforcement Directorate at the given
venue, time and dates mentioned in the
respective
summons
and
has
thus,
contravened the provisions of Section 56 of
the Act.
Letter
Such
11
stand
by
person
facing
Page 11 of 16
allegation
of
serious
nature
could
hardly
be
is
still
liable
for
the
punishment
12
Page 12 of 16
and
orders...
findings
given
in
the
aforesaid
Such an exposition of
13
Page 13 of 16
Admittedly, such an
Though, in our
14
Page 14 of 16
...J.
[ J. CHELAMESWAR ]
....J.
[ ADARSH KUMAR GOEL ]
NEW DELHI
JULY 13, 2015
15
Page 15 of 16
COURT NO.4
SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal
No(s).
1406/2009
VIJAY MALLYA
Appellant(s)
VERSUS
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE,
MIN.OF FINANCE.
Respondent(s)
was
called
on
for
For Appellant(s)
M/s. Khaitan & Co.
For Respondent(s)
judgment
with
exemplary
costs
quantified
at
(RENUKA SADANA)
COURT MASTER
16
Page 16 of 16