P V PRABHAKARA RAO Vs. ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the accused in C.C.No. 17/98 on the file of the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad for quashing the proceedings therein.

(2.) The first respondent herein, which is the Enforcement Directorate (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act), Hyderabad, represented by its Chief Enforcement Officer, Hyderabad, filed a complaint before the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad against the petitioner herein, who is the accused, for the offences under Sections 56 read with Section 40 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (for short, "the Act"), contending as follows :The complainant is a Central Government Investigating Agency relating to the offences covered under the Act. The role of the petitioner herein is suspected regarding unauthorised receipt of payments and kick backs in this country and abroad in the case popularly known as "Urea Scam", where it came to be known during the course of investigation that huge amounts were received by various persons by way of commissions and a part of such amount was received through "Hawala" channels in India. In connection with the investigation in the said case, the petitioner was required to be interrogated and examined by the complainant In that connection, summons were issued on number of occasions at the instance of the complainant under Section 40 of the Act requiring the petitioner herein to appear before the complainant at Hyderabad for being examined and interrogated and he however disobeyed the summons even though he was having knowledge of such summons which could not be served upon him personally and which were affixed to the door of his residence. Such summons were issued on the last occasion on 17-2-98 requiring the petitioner to appear before the complainant on 23-2-1998 and inspite of the same, he failed to appear before the complainant and instead gave an evasive reply. Non-appearance of the petitioner in pursuance of such summons under Section 40 of the Act is an offence punishable under Section 56 of the said Act. As such, the complaint was filed before the Special Judge for Economic Offences, Hyderabad on 28-2-1998 for the offence under Section 56 read with Section 40 of the Act

(3.) After going through the contents of the complaint filed on 28-2-98 and after recording the sworn statement of the Chief Enforcement Officer, who filed the complaint on behalf of the complainant, the learned Special Judge for Economic Offences took the case on file on 5-3-1998 for the above said offences and issued Non Bailable Warrants to secure the presence of the petitioner as it was felt that summons might not be served on him in view of his past conduct, and as the case, which was taken on file, is a warrant case.