LAWRENCE BRITO Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings initiated under the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) inter alia on the ground that he has committed no offence punishable under Sec. 9(1)(b) of the Act.

(2.) The facts briefly stated are as follows. The petitioner is a civil contractor residing at Bajpe close to Mangalore City in Karnataka State. It suffices to say that he has a brother, admittedly, working in Dubai at Bank of Pakistan in the United Arab Emirates. On 12/04/1989 the Enforcement Director, Government of India, Southern Zone, Madras, 2nd respondent herein and the Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate, Southern Zone, Madras, conducted raid and search of the residential premises of the petitioner at Bajpe. They seized a sum of Rs. 1,69,350/ - found in the steel cupboard in his house as well as three letters written by the petitioners brother to his father in Konkani language. Thereafter, he was served with a show cause notice as at Annexure-J. The show cause notice is dated 25-10-1989 calling upon him to show cause why he should not be subjected to adjudication proceedings in accordance with the provision made in Sec.51 of the Act read with the rules made thereunder. Aggrieved by the same, he has approached this Court for a writ of prohibition inter alia on the ground that no prima facie case is made out for commencing prosecution or proceedings under Sec.51 of the Act, as the letters seized or the money seized do not themselves constitute an offence.

(3.) This submission overlooks the fact that on 12-4-1989 as evidenced by Annexure-E a statement by the petitioner before respondents 2 and 3 wherein he admitted that Rs. 1,69,350/- the amount seized at the time of the raid and search was received by him from a stranger whose description he gave and who had delivered the said sum on the instructions of his brother working at Dubai, United Arab Emirates and that he had been instructed by telephone by his brother in that regard of the arrival of the money which was meant for construction of a house for his brother. It is pursuant to that statement, apparently, that the adjudication proceedings have been initiated.