2021 (5) TMI 1061 - HC - FEMA

Offence under FEMA - direction to the Respondent Bank to de-freeze the account - HELD THAT - Evident it is from the communication that it is because of the forgery of passport and initiation of an investigation by the Enforcement Directorate has resulted in freezing of the account. The petitioner for the reason best known to him has not disclosed these facts in the petition rather concealed these facts. We are not inclined to entertain the petition where the petitioner has not come to the court with clean hands. consequently, petition fails and is dismissed. In the present case, we refrain from imposing the cost on the petitioner and expect that the petitioner in future while filing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution shall disclose all the relevant facts. As we have held that the petition is not entertainable for the reason supra, we decline the prayer of the petitioner for withdrawal of petition and filing of fresh petition.

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashment of a communication dated 05.03.2021 and direction to de-freeze the account.

Analysis:
The petitioner sought the quashment of a communication dated 05.03.2021 and a direction to the Respondent Bank to de-freeze the account. The communication revealed that the freezing of the account was due to the forgery of a passport and the initiation of an investigation by the Enforcement Directorate. The court noted that the petitioner did not disclose these crucial facts in the petition, indicating a lack of coming to the court with clean hands. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for failure to disclose all relevant facts while filing under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court refrained from imposing costs on the petitioner but emphasized the importance of full disclosure in future petitions.

The petitioner requested to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a fresh one with new documents. However, the court, having found the petition not maintainable due to non-disclosure of material facts, denied the request for withdrawal and filing of a fresh petition. The court advised the petitioner to seek appropriate legal remedies concerning the actions taken by the Enforcement Directorate through the proper legal channels. No costs were awarded in the matter, and the judgment concluded with this disposition.

This judgment highlights the significance of full disclosure of all material facts when approaching the court for relief under Article 226 of the Constitution. Failure to provide complete information may lead to the dismissal of the petition, as seen in this case where the petitioner's non-disclosure of crucial details resulted in the rejection of the plea for quashment of the communication and de-freezing of the account. The court's decision underscores the importance of transparency and honesty in legal proceedings to ensure fair and just outcomes.