GIRDHARI LAL GUPTA Vs. D H MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We disposed of Criminal Appeals Nos. 211 and 212 of 1959 by our judgment dated August 18, 1970* whereby the appeals of Girdharilal Gupta, and Bhagwandeo Tewari against their convictions were dismissed. Girdharilal Gupta put in this review petition stating that the counsel had omitted to bring to our notice the provisions of S. 23C (2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947-hereinafter referred to as the Act-which has a vital bearing on the case. The judgment in Criminal Appeal No. 211 of 1959 has, therefore, been reopened. We may mention that Bhagwandeo Tewari has not filed a review petition against his conviction, upheld by this Court.

(2.) Mr. Daphtary contends then on the facts, as found by us, the appellant, Girdhari Lal Gupta, does not come within the purview of S. 23C (1) or S. 23C (2) of the Act. Sections 23C (1) and 23C (2) read as follows:

(3.) Mr. Daphtary contends that there is no evidence to show that the appellant was in charge of the conduct of the business of the firm at the relevant time and therefore, S. 23C (1) does not apply. He further says that as the appellant was abroad, the contravention took place without his knowledge. We may mention, however, that the defence that he was abroad at the relevant time was not taken in the courts below. At the time of the last hearing learned counsel produced the passport of the appellant before us from which it appears that he was abroad at that time and came back a few days after the alleged contravention.