Karnataka High Court
The Union Of India vs Winston Tan on 16 March, 2009
Equivalent citations: 2009 (4) AIR KAR R 408
Author: V.G.Sabhahit
Bench: V.G.Sabhahit
IN THE HIGH counr or
'AT BANGALORE
Dated this the 16"! day of % Z --
Pmsmwr
THE HONBLI3 m. P 9 %
TI-IE HoN':BLE sanmmw
Writ Ap, pg :11 Na;?I_'_._31=9zA53;iO_7«:("§C}1'J-RES)
BETWEEN
1 THE_L;NI(3N"oEI,NmA- V '-
mam ozmiuamrgg
GOVERNMEN'F.Q'FINDIR . '
NEW_DELHI_ " _
BY 1Ti3__MIN:s?R&'--..oF I«'mA«rJcI3
2 TEE COEviPE'E'E'.NT AK-ITH()RiTY
. s3,MU'c3GLERs&; FOREIGN EXCHANGE
. - _.1MA;§:.PU%LATORsWGRFEITURE or? -
PP.O£?EI§'f1'"{.}VACT
T UTS.A,_V,.,64:f1: G N CHETTY ROAD
N=nG.aR,.cfiENNA:~600 01*? .. AFPELLABFFS
[By Sri Aravind Kumar, ASG]
'WINSTON TAN
Sf O.WINS'I'ON TAN
R[A'I'.FLA'I' NOD04
KAMALA MANSION
GROUND FLOOR
ROMENADE PLACE
Ne'
filed by the respondents 1 and 2 herein,
the order dated 23-6~2005, Whereunder the
to have been acquired by the re_spc;'ndents_1 :-got
forfeited in View of Section 6'.,theV' fioreilcgiii»
Exchange Manipulators. Act, 1976
[for short, the Act], Judge quashed
the same .::&'remende(i:::, to the second
respondent further direction to
the and 2 -- Writ petitioners
and to vihoid proceeding further in the
matter, in the principles of natural justice.
Rdofioiidfiilts 3 and 4- are the original owners of the
from whom the respondents 1 and 2 --
-V have purchased it, after the initiation of the
V' "faction tinder Section 6 of the Act, but however, the
respondents 3 and 4, despite service of notice them,
V u heiroided the proceedings, both before the learned Single
Judge as well as before this court, in spite of newspaper
publication of the notice in The Times of India, dated 2&2-
2009, notifying that the matter will be takenfup'
hearing today.
3. The undisputed facts __
are treated as 'the persons', éection
2(1) of the Act, on t_'t'1eV_'of Act are
attracted. A detention came to be
passed against" the provisions
of the and Prevention of
Atct,~:'_'vv_:9'7uftVVFIOFEPOSA], pm-suam to
which preeeedhigdtte. the property acquired by the
V respondents 4, as provided under Section 6 of the Act,
'on 8- 1i2H;t2003. An explanation was called from
and 4 by the said notice issued under
. Section V-6(i}:"'of the Act. Thereafter on 21-442004, the
it 0' ' fl--respo_ndVents 3 and 4 were served with a second notice to
-0 their explanation on or before 4-5-2004. On receipt
" efithe second notice dated 2144-12004, respondents 3 and-4
submitted their explzmation on 26«5«~2004, wherein the
respondents 3 and 4 also sought for personal hearing, on
which date the proceeding was adjourned at
the request of respondents 3 and 4 and
to 25-27-2004 and finally it was 4pg1o-2foo4o p giyin~g
fair opportunity to the respondents_T3- and
avoided personal hearing. 2 was
adjourned to 16-3-20!.£:)p_$j. toVv't3(V)fl-3~20O5, on
which date too, the absent.
As a result, 3 and 4
on 3-5~200:'.$..,. directorate, as they
continued -and' an order of forfeiture was
passed Section 7(1) of the Act, which
V was petition.
V' In inxeanwhfle, on 10-2~2005, respondents 3 and 4
sotd in question in favour of the respondents I
and 2 ~44 xtriit petitioners. The respondents 1 and 2 ---- writ
pdpetifjoiiers chalienged the impugned proceedings of
h forfeiture of the property on the grounds that they had never
-« :been heard before passing the impugned order and that the
impugned order dated 23-6-2005 violates the principles of
V' :2 person has been convicted of an ofience
wholesale price_ of the goods in the
._ "-ordirufiy of trade in India as on the date of
' the of the ojfenoe.
* : "reactive", in relation to a person, means -
- ! "fij : spouse of the person;
'T (ii) brother or sister of the person;
10
sectionéi, read with subsection (5) of.,
12A, ofthatAct; or "
(iv) Such order of detention u
by a court of competent ~:' -- 2 _
((3) every person who _ a rehtive of
referred to in clause {afar clcmse '
(at) every associate perso;z._referred (a)
or clauses (b); V ._ 'A
(e) any holder -'Vita' this clause _
refen*er.i"to as titeii p_re4$e§ru':3 heider) of any
propertyfi:;w'hieh a.tVany--£:1Eme previously
held' by ~.referred»to in clause (a)
or arms (5) thefpresent holder or,
,a"e~t.he. trtczy-.be, 'rz.v:.rg"one who held such
pmpeirfii%y_«VofierV%e:;¢h person and before the
pres-eat __or was a transferee in
,faith ;,for_ tuieqtzate consideration
Q For purposes of sub-clause (i)
(a), "the...:;a£ue of any goods in relation to
Exploinatian 2.----For the purposes of clause (0),
(iii) brother or sister of the spouse of the person;
£2
3 3:? J'
a':»*"""'"
18
declared as null and void. Therefore, it is not
Court to elasticaliy extend the principles of _i1aivL:ii'ai 'j"e1s'tjce_ .
ail the cases, where a notice is not =at file
statute by operatian 01' law.
13. In the result, andvyihéx impugned
order passed by thc aside.
Chlef Justice
Sd/-2
Judge
.....
V _ :eee;;%.a%ee; Nb" 2 . Rik; e _