Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding

🚨 Important Update for Our Users

We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.

⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025

If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please let us know via our feedback form so we can address them promptly.

  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases FEMA FEMA + HC FEMA - 1999 (4) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password



 

1999 (4) TMI 620 - HC - FEMA

Issues:
Delay in trial leading to violation of right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of a criminal complaint filed against him under Section 56 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA). The complaint alleged various violations of FERA, including failure to recover foreign exchange, making unauthorized payments, and not offering acquired foreign exchange for sale. The complaint was filed in 1986, and as of 1987, only one witness had been partly examined, causing the petitioner to claim infringement of his right to a speedy trial.

The petitioner argued that the delay in trial violated his fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The court noted that while speedy trial is not explicitly mentioned as a fundamental right, the Supreme Court has recognized it as an essential part of the right to life and liberty. The court referred to previous judgments emphasizing the importance of expeditious proceedings at all stages of a trial, including investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal, revision, and re-trial.

The court considered the delay in the present case, where no significant progress had been made in over a decade since the filing of the complaint. Despite granting multiple opportunities to the prosecution to present evidence, no substantial steps were taken to move the trial forward. The court highlighted the prosecution's lack of explanation for the delay, attributing it vaguely to the substitution of the complainant due to death.

Based on the principles laid down by previous judgments, the court concluded that the petitioner's right to a speedy trial had been infringed. Considering the prolonged uncertainty and agony faced by the petitioner, the court decided to quash the proceedings and discharge the petitioner. The court held that it was not a fit case to prolong the trial further and ordered the release of the petitioner from the case.

In conclusion, the court found the delay in the trial to be unjustified and a violation of the petitioner's right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. As a result, the court quashed the proceedings against the petitioner and discharged him from the case, bringing an end to the prolonged legal ordeal.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates