C.B.I. vs Pratap Chandra Reddy

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 601 OF 2009

C.B.I. ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS

Pratap Chandra Reddy ….Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. This appeal is filed against the final judgment

and order dated 04.10.2006 passed by the High

Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Revision

Petition No.115 of 1999 whereby the High Court Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by ANITA MALHOTRA Date: 2018.12.11 17:50:52 IST Reason: 1 allowed the revision petition filed by the respondent

herein.

2. By order dated 26.03.2007, this Court issued

notice limited to the question on the correctness of

the High Court's order so far as it relates to the

applicability of Foreign Contribution (Regulation)

Act 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the “FCRA”).

3. We heard the learned counsel for the parties

and also perused the written submissions filed by

the respondent.

4. It is not in dispute that the matter is sub

judice and pending in the Court of Chief

Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi in a case titled CBI

vs. Nemi Chand Jain and others in relation to

certain offences alleged to have been committed by

the respondent, which are punishable under the

2 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as

“IPC”) and FCRA.

5. In our view, the issue with regard to the

applicability of the provisions of the FCRA to the

case at hand can be decided more properly only

after the evidence is adduced by the prosecution

and the material, if any, is brought on record by

means of evidence against the appellant in the case.

6. At the initial stage of the proceedings in this

case, it does not appear appropriate or possible to

probe this issue and decide it on merits one way or

the other for want of adequate material. It is for this

reason, we decline to examine the issue at this stage

in these proceedings and leave the parties to raise

this plea only after the prosecution adduces the

evidence on merits. The Trial Court will then record

3 its finding at that stage in accordance with law

while disposing of the case.

7. Since the trial is pending for quite a long time,

we direct the concerned Magistrate to proceed with

the matter and dispose of the same in accordance

with law within a period of one year from the date of

this order without being influenced by any of the

observations of the High Court made in the

impugned order and in this order. In fact, we

refrain ourselves from recording any finding on

various submissions urged by the learned counsel

for the respondent in his written submissions in the

light of what we have observed supra.

4

8. With these observations, the appeal stands

disposed of.

.………...................................J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE]

…...……..................................J. [INDU MALHOTRA]

New Delhi;

December 11, 2018

5