Friday, August 7

Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court, in its ruling on Arjun Patil v. Union of India & Ors., clarified two key aspects concerning foreign exchange law. It held that Indian currency involved in unauthorized foreign exchange dealings could be confiscated under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA). The Court also emphasized that appeals to the High Court under Section 35 of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA), are restricted solely to questions of law and do not extend to factual disputes. The judgment delineates the boundary between legal and factual considerations in foreign exchange enforcement cases.

Read More

The Delhi High Court has acquitted Rahul Bhupinder Verma, previously convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that allegations of “physical relations” without clear details or supporting evidence cannot substantiate charges of rape or penetrative sexual assault. The court noted that terms like “physical relations” and “sambandh” must be explicitly defined to meet the legal standards. It further observed delays in filing the FIR, lack of medical or forensic proof, and absence of foundational facts for applying the statutory presumption under Section 29 of POCSO.

In Practical Solutions Inc. v. State of Telangana, the Supreme Court held that when a High Court refuses to quash an FIR, it cannot indirectly protect the accused from arrest by directing the police to follow procedures like notice under Section 35(3) BNSS (earlier Section 41A CrPC) without proper reasons. The Court said such relief can be granted only after considering the merits and hearing the complainant. Relying on Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, it set aside the High Court’s order and sent the case back for fresh consideration.