2010 (8) TMI 462 - HC - FEMA

Release of seized material - principle the respondents have agreed to return the articles/documents - But respondents still not received approval from the Headquarters Office - petitioner cannot be made to wait endlessly for return of the said documents/articles - respondents are directed to return the documents/articles as and when necessary Held that - respondents have some reservations regarding returning the same at this stage, considering the period of time that has elapsed since the date of seizure of the documents, the respondents cannot be permitted to retain the same for a much longer period petitioner not be permitted to raise any grievance on future if not turns up to collect document

Summary

Issues:
Petition for return of seized documents and articles by Directorate of Enforcement officials.

Analysis:
The petitioner filed a petition seeking the return of various documents and articles seized during a search by Directorate of Enforcement officials. The petitioner requested the return of items crucial for the smooth operation of their business, including laptops, original documents, registry papers, phone diaries, sales files, and more. Despite repeated requests and a legal notice, the documents were not returned, causing prejudice to the petitioner.

In response, the respondents stated that approval was required from the Headquarters Office before releasing certain items. They agreed to return some documents but expressed reservations about others needed for related investigations. The court noted the delay in receiving approval and directed the respondents to return specified original documents within a stipulated time, with the petitioner undertaking to produce them as needed. Photocopies of remaining documents were also ordered to be provided within a set timeframe.

For documents where reservations were expressed, the court acknowledged the time elapsed since seizure and directed their return within a specified deadline. The judgment outlined clear timelines for the return of different categories of documents, allowing the respondents to retain copies for their investigation purposes.

The judgment concluded by directing the petitioner to file an undertaking regarding the production of original documents and warned of consequences for failing to comply. It also clarified that if the petitioner did not collect the returned documents, they could not raise grievances in the future. The petition was disposed of with no costs awarded, and direct service was permitted.