2018 (3) TMI 2049 - HC - Indian Laws

Whether conviction of an Indian by a foreign Court for the offence committed in that country can be taken notice of by the Courts or authorities in India? - whether such conviction would be binding on Courts and authorities in India while exercising judicial and quasi judicial powers? HELD THAT - It appears to be a settled principle of law laid down by English Court that though the decrees of penal laws of foreign country cannot be enforced in United Kingdom the laws of foreign countries and especially the countries with which the United Kingdom has friendly relations cannot only be looked into but on the principle of comity are required to be given due recognition. A valuable right is not only available to Indian citizen but any person if he has been either convicted or acquitted of such offence by the Court of competent jurisdiction. He cannot be tried again while such conviction or acquittal remains in force. Not only that he cannot also be tried on the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might have been made under sub-section (1) of section 221 or for which he might have been convicted under sub-section (2) thereof. The provisions of IPC would also apply to any offence committed by any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India. It would also apply to any offence committed by any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India wherever it may be. It would also apply to any offence committed by any person in any place without and beyond India committing offence targeting a computer resource located in India. The Explanation (a) thereof provides that the word offence includes every act committed outside India which if committed in India would be punishable under the Code. Conclusion - Foreign convictions can be noticed by Indian courts and authorities. The judgment and order of conviction of a foreign Court for the offence committed in India can be noticed/looked into and recognized by judicial and quasi judicial authorities in India while exercising their judicial and quasi judicial powers it cannot be said that the same will be ipso facto binding on such Courts and authorities. If we hold that such a judgment of a foreign Court for an offence committed in that country is binding on the Courts and authorities in India while exercising their judicial and quasi judicial powers it will amount to directly or indirectly enforcing the judgment of the foreign Court. The Courts and authorities while exercising their judicial and quasi judicial powers will have to take a call on the facts and circumstances of each case and take a decision as to what is the effect of such judgment and order of conviction. Petition disposed off.

Summary

1. ISSUES PRESENTED and CONSIDERED

The core legal issues considered in this judgment are:

• Whether the conviction of an Indian by a foreign court for an offense committed in that country can be taken notice of by the courts or authorities in India.
• Whether such a conviction would be binding on the courts and authorities in India while exercising their judicial and quasi-judicial powers.

2. ISSUE-WISE DETAILED ANALYSIS

Issue 1: Noticeability of Foreign Convictions

• Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The court examined various precedents, including English judgments and Indian constitutional provisions, such as Article 20(2) and Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which protect against double jeopardy.
• Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court emphasized the distinction between recognizing and enforcing foreign judgments. It noted that while foreign penal decrees cannot be enforced, they can be recognized for certain purposes, such as ensuring compliance with international comity and preventing double jeopardy.
• Key Evidence and Findings: The court reviewed English case law, which supports the recognition of foreign penal laws without enforcing them, to maintain international comity.
• Application of Law to Facts: The court applied these principles to conclude that foreign convictions can be noticed by Indian courts and authorities, particularly to uphold rights under Article 20(2) and Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
• Treatment of Competing Arguments: The court addressed arguments against recognizing foreign convictions, noting that such recognition is necessary to prevent double jeopardy and uphold international comity.
• Conclusions: The court concluded that foreign convictions can be noticed by Indian courts and authorities.

Issue 2: Binding Nature of Foreign Convictions

• Relevant Legal Framework and Precedents: The court considered the implications of enforcing foreign judgments and the principles of international comity.
• Court's Interpretation and Reasoning: The court reasoned that while foreign convictions can be recognized, they are not automatically binding on Indian courts and authorities. The binding nature depends on various factors, including the nature of proceedings and the purpose of considering the conviction.
• Key Evidence and Findings: The court examined the potential consequences of binding foreign convictions, noting that it could amount to enforcing foreign judgments indirectly.
• Application of Law to Facts: The court applied these principles to determine that the binding nature of foreign convictions should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
• Treatment of Competing Arguments: The court acknowledged the concerns about enforcing foreign judgments but maintained that recognition does not equate to enforcement.
• Conclusions: The court concluded that foreign convictions are not ipso facto binding on Indian courts and authorities.

3. SIGNIFICANT HOLDINGS

• Preserve Verbatim Quotes of Crucial Legal Reasoning: "The comity of nations normally requires our courts to recognise the jurisdiction of a foreign state over all its own nationals and all assets situated within its own territories."
• Core Principles Established: The judgment established the principle that while foreign convictions can be recognized by Indian courts for certain purposes, they are not automatically binding. The recognition is essential for upholding international comity and preventing double jeopardy.
• Final Determinations on Each Issue:
  • Foreign convictions can be noticed by Indian courts and authorities.
  • Foreign convictions are not automatically binding on Indian courts and authorities; the binding nature depends on specific circumstances.

The court's decision highlights the nuanced approach required when dealing with foreign convictions, balancing the need for international comity with the protection of individual rights under Indian law.